"irstBattle 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/firstbattlestoryOObryaiala 


R^DTO 


The  First  Battle 


Sfc 


The  First  Battle 


A  Story  of  the  Campaign  of  1896 


BY 

WILLIAM  J.  BRYAN, 


TOGETHER   WITH  A    COLLECTION  OF  HIS  SPEECHES  AMD 
A  BIOGRAPHICAL  SKETCH  BY  HIS  WIFE. 


...THustrated... 


W.  B.  CONKEY  COMPANY. 
CHICAGO. 


JK     - 
2,3/7 


Entered  according  to  act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1896, 

By  William  J.  Bkyan, 

In  the  office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington,  D.  C. 

All  Biqhts  Besebveo. 


MANUFACTURED  BY  THE 

W.    B.    CONKCY  COMPANY, 

CHICAQO,  U.  &  A. 


PUBLISHERS'  PREFACE 


THE  object  of  "The  First  Battle"  is  to  present  an  account  of  the 
leading  events  and  issues  of  the  most  critical  campaign  in 
American  history.  The  work  contains  an  interesting  descrip- 
tion of  the  author's  famous  tour,  including  his  most  important 
speeches,  together  with  the  principal  addresses  and  documents  identi- 
fied with  the  campaign  of  1896;  the  whole  embodying  a  faithful  pre- 
sentation of  the  rise  and  development  of  the  silver  movement.  It  also 
contains  a  review  of  the  political  situation  and  an  analysis  of  the 
election  returns.  At  our  request  the  author  has  included  a  biographi- 
cal sketch  written  by  Mrs.  Bryan. 

The  name  and  fame  of  the  author  may  induce  unscrupulous  pub- 
lishers to  issue  fraudulent  imitations  of  "The  First  Battle."  We  desire 
to  state  that  this  book  will  appear  under  no  other  title  than  "The  First 
Battle,"  copyrighted  by  William  J.  Bryan  and  bearing  the  imprint 
of  W.  B.  Conkey  Company. 

THE   PUBLISHERS. 


PREFACE. 


^,0^     ^      ^'^  .i.^>^.-^.^.^~-.-t---^  -7^      -r 


</*i^/iijt^^y<^l^   ^ 


It 


12 


PREFACE. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


•  FAQE. 

Publishers'  Preface 9 

Preface 1 1 

Index  to  Speeches,  Addresses  and  Documents 15 

List  of  Illustrations 19 

Introduction 23 

Biography 33 

CHAFTEB. 

I.  My  Connection  with  the  Silver  Question  Begins 71 

II.  Unconditional  Repeal 76 

III.  Bolting  Discussed 122  ^ 

IV.  Seigniorage,  Currency  and  Gold  Bonds 128 

V.  Pioneer  Work  in  Nebraska 149 

VI.  The  Silver  Sentiment  Developing 153 

VII.  The  Republican  National  Convention 168 

VIII.  The  Silver  Republicans 178 

IX.  The  Democratic  National  Convention 188 

X.  Contest  Over  the  Platform 197 

XI.  The  Presidential  Nomination 210 

XII.  Mr.  Sewall's  Nomination 221 

XIII.  Homeward  Bound 233 

XIV.  The  Silver  Party  Convention 238 

XV.  The  Populist  Convention 259 

XVI.  The  Triple  Demand 280 

XVII.  Three  National  Committees 287 

XVIII.  Preparing  for  the  Campaign 296 

XIX.  From  Nebraska  to  the  Sea 300 

XX.  At  Madison  Square  Garden 307 

XXI.  On  the  Hudson 339 

XXII.  From  Albany  to  Cleveland 351 

XXIII.  From  Cleveland  to  Chicago .  359 

XXIV.  At  Milwaukee 366 

XXV.  Labor  Day 375 

XXVI.    The  Bolting  Democrats 386 

XXVII.    Letters  of  Acceptance  of  Republican  Candidates 392 

XXVIII.    The  Democratic  Platform 406 

XXIX.     Nomination  of  Silver  Party  Accepted 426 

XXX.    Populist  Nomination  Tendered  and  Accepted 430 

XXXI.     Mr.  Sewall's  Speech  and  Letter 434 

XXXII.    Third  Trip  Commences 44i 

XXXIII.  In  the  South 445 

XXXIV.  From  Washington  to  Wilmington 459 

XXXV.    Religion  and  Politics  Mixed 469 

13 


14  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER.  PAGE. 

XXXVI.    From  Philadelphia  to  Brooklyn 476 

XXXVII.    In  New  England 484 

XXXVIII.    Tammany  Hall  and  Vicinity 507 

XXXIX.    Traveling  Westward 512 

XL.    Meeting  of  the  Democratic  Clubs 518 

XLI.    To  Chicago  via  Tennessee 525 

XLII.    A  Trip  Through  the  Northwest 534 

XLIII.    At  Minneapolis  and  Duluth 538 

I     XLIV.    Through  the  Two  Peninsulas 555 

XLV.    Among  the  Buckeyes  and  Hoosiers 566 

XLVI.    In  the  Sucker  State 570 

XLVII.    The  Chicago  Campaign 580 

XLVIII.    From  Lake  Michigan  to  Nebraska 592 

XLIX.     My  Labors  Ended 602 

L.    The  Election  Returns 605 

LI.    Reminiscences 612 

*  LII.    Explanations 621 

LIIL    The  Future • 625 


INDEX  TO  SPEECHES,  ADDRESSES    AND 
DOCUMENTS. 


PAGE. 

Against  Gold  Bonds,  Speech 135 

Albany  Speech 350 

Allen,  Speech  of  Permanent  Chairman 264 

Alliance  Speech 305 

Appeal  for  Funds 2gi 

Asheville  Speech 44g 

Baltimore  Speech 462 

Bath  Speech 503 

Behrends,  Opinion  of  Rev,  Mr 472 

Bimetallists,  Address  to 625 

Bismarck  Letter 483 

Bloomington  Speech 577 

Boston  Speech  At  Banquet 4g3 

Boston  Speech  At  Music  Hall 494 

Brooklyn  Speech 47g 

Buffalo  Speech 353 

Butler,  Speech  of  Temporary  Chairman 259 

Caffery,  Speech  of  Permanent  Chairman  387 

Canton  Speech 305 

Carlisle's  Speech  in  1878 164 

Carlisle,  Message  of  Mr 388 

Carpenters'  International  Union,  Resolutions  of 590 

Chicago  Speech  To  Business  Men 382 

Chicago  Speech — First  Reception 303 

Chicago  Speech — Second  Reception 580 

Cincinnati  Speech 517 

Clarksburg  Speech 512 

Cleveland's  Letter  on  Sound  Money 158 

Cleveland,  Message  of  Mr 388 

Cleveland,  Last  Message  of  President 421 

Committees,  Three  National 287 

Counting  a  Quorum 57 

Daniel,  Speech  of  Temporary  Chairman 189 

Debate  on  Chicago  Platform,  Speech  Concluding 199 

Democratic  Platform 406 

Democartic  Nomination,  Letter  Accepting 409 

Des  Moines  Speech 301 

Detroit  Speech 562 

Dixon,  Opinion  of  Rev.  Mr 473 

Dover  Speech 465 

Elkhart  Speech 362 

15 


16  INDEX. 

FAOE. 

Enemies  Country 3°° 

Erie  Speech 352 

Flower,  Speech  of  Temporary  Chairman 386 

Fredericksburg  Speech 457 

Flint  Speech 562 

Goldsboro  Speech 455 

Graduating  Oration 40 

Grand  Rapids  Speech  To  the  Ladies 555 

Groot,  Notification  Speech  of  Mr 426 

Hartford  Speech 488 

Hobart,  Letter  of  Acceptance  of  Mr 398 

Hornellsville  Speech 354 

Howard,  Nominating  Speech  of  Mr 270 

Important  Document,  Autograph  Signatures 156 

Indianapolis  Speech  At  the  Capitol 526 

Indianapolis  Speech  To  the  Traveling  Men 532 

International  Bimetallism  Speech 147 

Interview  Regarding  Vice-Presidential  Nomination 297 

Ireland,  Opinion  of  Archbishop 472 

Jacksonville  Speech 573 

Jefferson  City  Speech 236 

Jury  System,  The 55 

Kansas  City  Speech 442 

Labor  Petition 166 

Labor  Day  Speech  at  Chicago 375 

La  Salle  Speech 571 

Law  and  the  Gospel,  The 48 

Lewis,  Nominating  Speech  of  Mr 213 

Lexington  Speech 448 

Lincoln  Speech 237 

Little,  Nominating  Speech  of  Mr 254 

Lima  Speech 566 

Louisville   Speech 445 

Louisville  Courier-Journal,  Opinion  of 492 

McArthur,  Opinion  of  Dr 471 

McKinley,  Letter  of  Acceptance  of  Mr , 392 

Madison  Speech 593 

Madison  Square  Garden  Speech 315 

Madalin  Speech 342 

Manchester  Speech 503 

Marshall  Speech 561 

Memorial  Day  Address,  Arlington  Cemetery 64 

Mileage  on  First  Trip 237 

Mileage  on  Second  Trip 383 

Mileage  on  Third  Trip 597 

Mileage  on  Fourth  Trip 604 

Minority  Report,  Gold  Bonds 131 

Minneapolis  Speech  At  Exposition  Building 538 

Minneapolis  Speech  To  the  Ladies 547 


INDEX.  17 

PAGE. 

Minority  Report,  Democratic  Platform,  1896 198 

Milwaukee  Speech 366 

Money  Plank,  Nebraska  Convention,  1894 1 50 

Money  Plank  Republican  Platform,  1896 i6g 

Monmouth  Speech 572 

Morristown  Speech 479 

Myers,  Opinion  of  Rev.  Mr 473 

New  York  World,  Opinion  of 474 

New  York  Tribune,  Opinion  of 492 

Newark  Speech 507 

Newlands,  Speech  of  Temporary  Chairman 238 

Newton  Speech 301 

Notification,  Letter  of 313 

Nomination  of  Silver  Party,  Speech  Accepting 427 

Open  Letter  to  President  Cleveland 160 

Ottumwa  Speech 594 

Paterson  Speech 507 

Parkhurst,  Opinion  of  Dr 471 

Peoria  Speech 570 

People  Can  be  Trusted 344 

People's  Party  Platform 271 

Vote  of  1896 610 

Pittsburg  Speech 306 

Philosophy  of  Bolting,  The 124 

Philadelphia  Speech 476 

Platform  of  Bolting  Democrats 387 

Populist  Notification 430 

Populist  Nomination,  Letter  Accepting 432 

Populist  Committee,  Address  Issued  by 293 

Vote  of  1 892 606 

Presentation  of  Gray's  Elegy 50 

Presidential  Nomination,  Official  Ballots 214 

Raleigh  Speech 452 

Rhinebeck   Speech 340 

Ripley  Speech 357 

Rothschild-Morgan  Contract 134 

Salem  Speech 233 

Senatorial  Defeat,  Letter  to  Friends 59 

Sewall,  Accepting  Nomination,  Letter  of  Mr 437 

Sewall,  Accepting  Nomination,  Speech  of  Mr 434 

Sewall,  Biographical  Sketch  of  Mr 229 

Sewall,  Letter  from  Mr 298 

Sewall,  Official  Ballot,  Nomination  of  Mr 223 

Sewall,  Speech  of  Mr.  Burk,  Nominating  Mr 221 

Sherman's  Letter,  Mr.,  1878 165 

Silver  Party  Platform 252 

Silver  Plank  for  Chicago  Convention,  Suggestion  for 177 

Silver  Republicans,  Address  of 178 

Silver  Republicans  Declare  for  Democratic  Ticket 182 


18  INDBX. 

PAOS. 

Springfield,  Ohio,  Speech 360 

Springfield,  Mass.,  Speech 489 

St.  John,  Speech  of  Permanent  Chairman 248 

St.  Louis  Speech 518 

St.  Paul  Speech 536 

Stone,  Notification  Speech  of  Mr 307 

Talmage,  Opinion  of  Dr 474 

Tammany  Hall  Speech 509 

Teller's  Farewell  Address,  Senator 170 

Unconditional  Repeal,  Final  Protest 120 

Unconditional  Repeal,  First  Speech 76 

Unconditional  Repeal,  Principal  Speech "j-j 

Unconditional  Repeal,  Third   Speech 114 

Vote  on  Adoption  of  Platform 207 

Washington  Speech 459 

Weaver,  Nominating  Speech  of  Mr 276 

Wheeling  Speech 514 

White,  Speech  of  Permanent  Chairman 126 

Wilmington  Speech 469 

Yale  College  Incident 484 


List  of  Illustrations 

«  «  «  « 

PAGE. 

W.  J.  Bryan,  .  -  .  .  ,        Frontispiece 

Dedicatory  Page,           -           -           -            -            -           -  21 

Mary  Baird  Bryan,  -            -           -           -           -            -  31 

Ruth  Baird  Bryan,         -            -            -            -            -           -  41 

William  Jennings  Bryan,  Jr.,          -            -            -            -  51 

Grace  Dexter  Bryan,     -            -            -            -               -        -  61 

Library,          ---_._.  67 
Silas  L.  Bryan,    -           -           -           -           -           -           -73 

Mariah  Elizabeth  Bryan,              -            -            -            -  gi 

Group  of  Mr.  Bryan,      -           -           -           -           -           -  loi 

Bryan  Farm  Residence,  near  Salem,  Illinois,      -            -  in 

Bryan  Residence,  Jacksonville,  Illinois,       -            -            -  112 

Bryan  Residence,  Lincoln,  Nebraska,      -            -            -  129 
Lyman  Trumbull,             -            -           -           -            -            -130 

Arthur  Sevvall,       -           -           -           -            -            -  139 

William  McKinley,       -           -           -            -            -            -  173 

Garret  A,  Hobart,               -           -           -           -           -  183 

Adlai  E.  Stevenson,       -           -           -           -           -           -  201 

John  W.  Daniel,        -  -  -  -  -  -211 

Stephen  M.  White,         ------  245 

Joseph  C.  S.  Blackburn,       -           -           -           -           -  255 

Horace  Boies,     -           -           -           -           -           -           -  256 

J.  R.  McLean,            --.---  273 

Claude  Matthews,         ------  274 

Robert  E.  Pattison,             -----  283 

Benjamin  R.  Tillman,     ------  284 

19 


20  LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued. 

PACE. 

John  P.  Altgeld,   -     -     -     -     -     -  3^7 

Joseph  C.  Sibley,     __----  318 

James  K.  Jones,    ____--  327 

W.  J.  Stone,    -     -     -     -     -   >  -     -  328 

Francis  G.  Newlands,          -           -            -        .    -            -  345 

William  P.  St,  John,     ------  346 

Charles  A.  Towne,               _            .            -            -            -  363 

C.  D.  Lane,          -            -            -            -            -            -            -  364 

George  A.  Groot,     -           -           -           -            -           -  381 

Marion  Butler,  -------  382 

Map  of  First  and  Second  Trip,      -            -            -            -  384 

William  V.  Allen,         ------  399 

S.  F.  Norton,            --__--  400 
Ignatius  Donnelly,        -           -           -           -           -           -417 

William  H.  Harvey,            -           -           -           -            -  418 

A.  J.  Warner,       -------  435 

John  P.  Jones,           ------  436 

William  M.  Stewart,     ------  453 

Snap  Shot  and  Crowd  at  Wellsville,  Ohio,        -            -  454 

Study  in  Hats,    -------  495 

Rochester  Meeting,            -----  496 

Writing  Set,       -------  529 

Convention  Hall,     -  -  -  -  -  -530 

Map  of  Third  and  Fourth  Trip,           -            -            -            -  600 

Election  of   1892,    ------  607 

Election  of  1896,           -           -           -           -           -            -  611 


INTRODUCTION. 


HON.    RICHARD    P.    BLAND    of    Missouri,    Gen.    James    B. 
Weaver  of  Iowa,  and  Hon.  Henry  M.  Teller  of  Colorado,  may, 
without  injustice  to  others,  be  considered  the  foremost  cham- 
pions of  bimetallism  in  their  respective  parties. 

Mr.  Blandt  Democrat. 
Mr.  Bland  was  first  elected  to  the  National  House  of  Representa- 
tives in  1872,  and  served  for  twenty-two  years.  In  the  Forty-fourth 
Congress,  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Mines  and  Mining,  he 
secured  the  passage  through  the  House  of  a  bill  providing  for  the  free 
and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i. 
During  the  same  Congress  he  was  appointed  a  member  of  the  com- 
mission which  prepared  the  "Silver  Commission  Report."  In  the 
Forty-fifth  Congress  he  introduced  and  secured  the  passage  through 
the  House  of  a  bill  similar  to  the  one  advocated  in  the  preceding. 
Congress,  but  the  bill  was  amended  in  the  Senate  and  was 
afterwards  known  as  the  Bland-Allison  act,  becoming  a  law  over 
the  President's  veto.  Some  three  hundred  and  eighty  millions  of 
standard  silver  dollars  were  coined  under  this  act.  Mr.  Bland,  during 
Mr.  Cleveland's  first  administration,  opposed  the  suspension  of  the 
Bland-Allison  act  and  also  endeavored  to  secure  the  passage  of  a  free 
coinage  bill.  In  the  Fifty-first  Congress  he  joined  with  the  silver 
men  in  the  Senate  in  an  efYort  to  secure  a  free  coinage 
measure  instead  of  the  act  of  1890,  known  as  the  Sherman  act. 
In  the  Fifty-third  Congress  he  led  the  fight  against  unconditional  re- 
peal and  against  the  retirement  of  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes 
with  an  issue  of  gold  bonds.  He  was  one  of  the  Democrats  who 
joined  in  the  address,  issued  March  4,  1895,  calling  upon  the  silver 
Democrats  to  organize  and  take  control  of  the  Democratic  party,  and 
was  largely  instrumental  also  in  securing  a  strong  declaration  in  favor 
of  free  coinage  at  16  to  i  in  the  Missouri  State  Convention,  held  at 

23 


24  INTRODUCTION. 

Pirtle  Springs  in  1895.  In  the  Chicago  Convention  he  received  the 
second  largest  number  of  votes  for  the  Presidential  nomination,  and 
during  the  campaign  which  followed  was  active  in  support  of  the  nomi- 
nees. His  name  is  known  among  the  students  of  the  money  question 
in  every  civilized  nation,  and  his  faithful  and  continuous  labors  in 
behalf  of  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  have  given  him  a  warm  place 
in  the  hearts  of  his  countrymen. 

Mr.  "Weaver,  Populist 

Mr.  Weaver  was  elected  to  Congress  in  1878,  and  served  in  the 
Forty-sixth,  Forty-ninth  and  Fiftieth  Congresses.  In  January,  1880, 
he  introduced  the  following  resolution: 

Resolved,  That  it  is  the  sense  of  this  House  that  all  currency,  whether 
metalHc  or  paper,  necessary  for  the  use  and  convenience  of  the  people,  should  be 
issued  and  its  volume  controlled  by  the  Government  and  not  by  or  through 
banking  corporations,  and  when  so  issued  should  be  a  full  legal  tender  in  pay- 
ment of  all  debts,  public  and  private. 

Resolved,  That  it  is  the  judgment  of  this  House  that  that  portion  of  the 
interest-bearing  debt  of  the  United  States  which  shall  become  redeemable  in 
the  year  1881,  or  prior  thereto,  being  in  amount  $782,000,000,  should  not  be  re- 
funded beyond  the  power  of  the  Government  to  call  in  said  obligations  and  pay 
them  at  any  time,  but  should  be  paid  as  rapidly  as  possible  and  according  to 
contract.  To  enable  the  Government  to  meet  these  obligations,  the  mints  of  the 
United  States  should  be  operated  to  their  full  capacity  in  the  coinage  of 
standard  silver  dollars  and  such  other  coinage  as  the  business  interests  of  the 
country  may  require. 

After  a  thirteen  weeks'  struggle  he  secured  consideration  of  this 
resolution,  but  it  was  defeated  by  a  vote  of  117  to  83. 

He  has,  ever  since  his  entrance  into  Congress,  been  a  consistent 
and  persistent  advocate  of  the  restoration  of  bimetallism.  He  was  the 
candidate  of  the  Greenback-Labor  party  for  President  in  1880,  and 
received  307,740  votes.  In  1892  he  was  the  candidate  of  the  Populist 
party  for  the  Presidency  and  received  1,040,600  votes.  His  platform 
in  1892  was  the  first  national  platform  to  expressly  declare  for  the 
ratio  of  16  to  i.  In  1894  he  was  nominated  for  Congress  on  a  16  to  i 
platform  in  the  Council  Bluflfs  (Iowa)  district  by  the  Populists  and 
Democrats.  After  the  Democratic  National  Convention  of  1896  had 
declared  unequivocally  for  independent  bimetallism,  Mr.  Weaver  took 


INTRODUCTION.  25 

an  active  part  in  securing  co-operation  between  the  silver  forces,  and, 
during  the  campaign,  gave  his  entire  time  to  the  success  of  the  cause. 
His  speech  in  the  St.  Louis  Convention,  which  will  be  found  in  a  sub- 
sequent chapter,  contains  his  defense  of  the  position  taken  by  him. 

Mr.  Teller,  Silver  Republican. 

Mr.  Teller  has  served  in  the  Senate  and  Cabinet  for  twenty  years, 
and  has  been  connected  with  the  silver  question  since  1880.  During 
that  time  he  has  done  much  in  and  out  of  Congress  with  tongue  and 
pen  to  advance  the  cause  of  bimetallism.  In  1892  he  was  instrumental 
in  securing  in  the  Republican  National  Convention  a  declaration  in 
favor  of  bimetallism,  and  he  was  a  conspicuous  actor  in  the  prolonged 
fight  in  the  Senate  against  unconditional  repeal.  His  standing  in,  and 
long  connection  with,  the  Republican  party,  together  with  his  great 
ability  and  high  character,  made  him  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the 
silver  Republicans.  At  St.  Louis  he  was  at  the  head  of  the  revolt 
against  the  Republican  platform,  and  his  withdrawal  from  the  party 
cost  the  Republican  candidate  thousands  of  votes.  The  silver  Repub- 
licans favored  his  nomination  for  the  Presidency,  and  his  State  voted 
for  him  on  the  first  ballot  in  the  Democratic  Convention.  After  the 
nomination  had  been  made  he  joined  with  other  leading  silver  Repub- 
licans in  an  address  supporting  the  Democratic  ticket  and  during  the 
campaign  did  yeoman  service  upon  the  stump. 

In  dedicating  this  book  to  these  three  pioneers,  I  desire  to  record 
my  appreciation  of  the  work  which  they  have  done,  my  esteem  for 
them  as  public  men  and  my  gratitude  to  them  for  their  many  acts  of 
kindness  to  me,  both  before  and  since  my  nomination. 

In  giving  an  account  of  my  travels  during  the  campaign  I  have  not 
attempted  to  mention  every  place  stopped  at,  nor  have  I,  as  a  rule, 
given  the  names  of  presiding  officers  and  reception  committees.  My 
time  during  waking  hours  was  so  fully  occupied  that  I  could  not  then 
make  a  memorandum  of  persons  and  events,  and,  since  neither  the 
newspapers  nor  my  memoiy  will  supply  a  correct  record,  I  have  gen- 
erally omitted  the  details  of  the  meetings,  except  where  I  met  some 
old  time  acquaintance  or  some  prominent  public  man.     I  declined 


26  •  INTRODUCTION. 

private  entertainment  as  far  as  possible  in  order  to  avoid  local  and 
factional  jealousies,  and  I  have  only  referred  to  social  courtesies  ex- 
tended where  there  seemed  a  special  justification  for  so  doing. 

Space  would  not  permit  a  reproduction  of  all  the  speeches  delivered 
by  me  during  the  campaign,  and  those  reproduced  are  not  usually 
given  in  full.  I  have  exercised  the  Congressional  privilege  of  "revising 
the  record,"  and  have,  to  a  large  extent,  eliminated  repetition.  The 
preparation  has  been  confined  to  so  short  a  time  and  the  work  has  been 
done  amidst  such  constant  interruptions  that  I  fear  many  errors  of 
expression  may  be  found  which  more  care  might  have  prevented. 


LIFE  OF 

William  Jennings  Bryan 


BY  HIS  WIFE. 


THE  impelling  cause  which  is  responsible  for  this  article  needs  no 
elaboration.    During  the  last  few  months,  so  many  conflicting 
statements  have  been  made  by  writers,  friendly  and  unfriendly, 
concerning  Mr.  Bryan's  ancestry,  habits,  education,  etc.,  that  a  short 
biography  based  upon  fact  seems  a  necessary  part  of  this  book. 

Writing  from  the  standpoint  of  a  wife,  eulogy  and  criticism  are 
equally  out  of  place.  My  only  purpose,  therefore,  is  to  present  in  a 
simple  story  those  incidents  which  may  be  of  interest  to  the  general 
reader. 


CZx,yn<^i 


BIOGRAPHY. 


ANCESTRY. 


WITHIN  the  last  few  years  Mr.  Bryan  has  corresponded  with  a 
number  of  persons  bearing  the  family  name.     Some  of  the 
Bryans  trace  their  ancestry  to  Ireland,  some  to  Wales,  while 
others  have  followed  the  name  through  Irish  into  English  history. 
A  biographical  sketch  written  under  the  supervision  of  Silas  L.  Bryan 
states  that  the  family  is  of  Irish  extraction. 

William  Bryan,  who  lived  in  Culpeper  County,  Virginia,  some- 
thing more  than  one  hundred  years  ago,  is  the  first  ancestor  whose 
name  is  known  to  the  descendants.  Where  he  was  born,  and  when, 
is  a  matter  of  conjecture.  He  owned  a  large  tract  of  land  among  the 
foothills  of  the  Blue  Ridge  Mountains,  near  Sperryville.  The  family 
name  of  his  wife  is  unknown.  There  were  born  to  the  pair  five  chil- 
dren: James,  who  removed  to  Kentucky;  John,  who  remained  upon 
the  homestead ;  Aquilla,  who  removed  to  Ohio ;  and  Francis  and  Eliza- 
beth, about  whom  nothing  is  known. 

John  Bryan,  the  second  son,  was  born  about  1790,  and  at  an  early 
age  married  Nancy  Lillard.  The  Lillard  family  is  an  old  American 
family  of  English  extraction  and  is  now  represented  by  numerous 
descendants  scattered  over  Virginia,  Kentucky  and  Tennessee.  To 
John  Bryan  and  wife  ten  children  were  born,  all  of  whom,  excepting 
Russell  and  Elizabeth,  are  deceased.  The  oldest,  William,  removed  to 
Missouri  in  early  life  and  lived  near  Troy  until  his  death,  some  ten  years 
ago.  John  and  Howard  died  in  infancy.  Jane  married  Joseph  Cheney 
and  lived  at  Gallipolis,  Ohio.  Nancy  married  George  Baltzell,  and 
lived  in  Marion  County,  Illinois.  Martha  married  Homer  Smith,  and 
lived  at  Gallipolis,  Ohio,  later  removing  to  Marion  County,  Illinois. 
The  next  child,  Robert,  a  physician,  was  killed  in  a  steamboat  explosion 
while  yet  a  young  man.  Silas  Lillard,  father  of  William  Jennings 
Bryan,  was  born  November  4th,  1822,  near  Sperryville,  in  what  was 
then  Culpeper,  but  is  now  a  part  of  Rappahannock  County,  Virginia. 
The  next  child,  Russell,  located  at  Salem,  Illinois,  where  he  has  since 
lived.  Elizabeth,  the  youngest  of  the  family,  married  another  George 
Baltzell.  She  early  removed  to  Lewis  County,  Missouri,  her  present 
home. 

33 


34  BIOGRAPHY. 

About  the  year  1828  John  Bryan  removed  with  his  family  to  the 
western  portion  of  Virginia,  in  what  is  now  West  Virginia.  His  last 
residence  was  near  Point  Pleasant,  where  both  he  and  his  wife  died, 
the  latter  in  1834,  the  former  in  1836. 

Silas,  then  but  a  boy,  went  West  and  made  his  home  a  part  of  the 
time  with  his  sister,  Nancy  Baltzell,  and  a  part  of  the  time  with  his 
brother,  William.  He  was  ambitious  to  obtain  an  education,  and  after 
making  his  way  through  the  public  schools,  entered  McKendree  Col- 
lege, at  Lebanon,  Illinois,  where  he  completed  his  course,  graduating 
with  honors,  in  1849.  Owing  to  lack  of  means  he  was  occasionally 
compelled  to  drop  out  of  college  for  a  time  and  earn  enough  to  con- 
tinue his  studies.  At  first  he  spent  these  vacations  working  as  a  farm 
liand,  but  later,  when  sufficiently  advanced  in  his  studies,  taught 
school.  After  graduation  he  studied  law,  was  admitted  to  the  bar, 
and  began  the  practice  at  Salem,  Illinois,  at  the  age  of  twenty-nine. 
On  November  4th,  1852,  he  married  Mariah  Elizabeth  Jennings.  Dur- 
ing the  same  year  he  was  elected  to  the  State  Senate  and  served  in 
that  body  for  eight  years.  In  i860  he  was  elected  to  the  circuit  bench, 
and  served  twelve  years.  In  1872  he  was  nominated  for  Congress 
upon  the  Democratic  ticket,  receiving  the  endorsement  of  the  Green- 
back party.  He  was  defeated  by  a  plurality  of  240  by  General  James 
Martin,  Republican  candidate.  As  a  member  of  the  convention  of 
1872,  which  framed  the  present  Constitution  of  Illinois,  he  introduced 
a  resolution  declaring  it  to  be  the  sense  of  the  convention  that  all  offi- 
ces, legislative,  executive  and  judicial,  provided  for  by  the  new  Con- 
stitution, should  be  filled  by  elections  by  the  people.  Before  his  elec- 
tion to  the  bench,  and  after  his  retirement  therefrom,  he  practiced  law 
in  Marion  and  the  adjoining  counties.  He  was  a  member  of  the  Baptist 
Church,  the  church  to  which  his  parents  belonged,  and  was  a  very 
devout  man.  He  prayed  at  morning,  noon  and  night,  and  was  a 
firm  believer  in  providential  direction  in  the  affairs  of  life.  He  was  a 
man  of  strong  character,  stern  integrity  and  high  purpose.  He  took 
rank  among  the  best  lawyers  in  Southern  Illinois,  and  was  a  fluent, 
graceful  and  forcible  speaker.  His  mind  was  philosophical  and  his 
speeches  argumentative.  In  politics  he  was  a  Democrat  in  the  broadest 
sense  of  the  word  and  had  an  abiding  faith  in  republican  institutions 
and  in  the  capacity  of  the  people  for  self-government.  He  was  a  staunch 
defender  of  higher  education  and  gave  financial  as  well  as  moral  sup- 
port to  various  institutions  of  learning.  He  regarded  the  science  of 
government  as  highly  honorable  and  used  to  say  that  the  guest  cham- 


BIOGRAPHY.  35 

ber  of  his  home  was  reserved  for  "politicians  and  divines."  He  was 
broad  and  tolerant  in  his  religious  views.  It  was  his  custom,  after  he 
removed  to  the  farm,  to  send  a  load  of  hay  at  harvest  time  to  each 
preacher  and  priest  in  Salem.  While  a  public  man  during  a  large  part 
of  his  life,  he  was  eminently  domestic.  He  died  March  30,  1880,  and 
was  buried  in  the  cemetery  at  Salem.  His  will  provided  that  all  of  his 
children  should  be  encouraged  to  secure  "the  highest  education  which 
the  generation  affords." 

The  Jennit^  Family. 

The  Jennings  family  has  lived  so  long  in  America  that  the  descend- 
ants do  not  know  the  date  of  the  immigration  of  the  ancestors  to  the 
colonies  nor  is  it  known  positively  from  what  country  they  came,  but 
they  are  believed  to  have  been  English. 

Israel  Jennings,  who  was  born  about  1774,  is  the  first  known  an- 
cestor. He  was  married  to  Mary  Waters  about  the  year  1799,  and 
lived  in  Mason  County,  Kentucky.  In  1818  he  moved  with  his 
family  to  Walnut  Hill,  Marion  County,  Illinois,  where  his  wife  died 
in  1844  and  he  m  i860.  He  was  the  father  of  eight  children:  Israel  Jr., 
and  George,  now  deceased;  Charles  Waters,  of  whom  I  shall 
speak  later;  William  W.,  now  living  in  Texas;  Elizabeth,  who 
married  William  Davidson;  America,  who  married  George  David- 
son; Mary,  who  married  Edward  White;  snd  Ann,  who  married  Rufus 
McElwain.     All  of  the  daughters  are  deceased. 

Charles  Waters  Jennings  was  married  to  Maria  Woods  Davidson, 
December  14th,  1826,  and  established  a  home  adjoining  the  Israel  Jen- 
nings homestead.  He  died  in  1872,  and  his  wife  in  1885.  To  this  pair 
were  born  eight  sons  and  two  daughters :  Josephus  Waters,  deceased, 
v.'ho  lived  near  the  home  of  his  father;  Harriet,  who  married  B.  F. 
Marshall,  and  lives  at  Salem,  lUinois;  Sarah,  who  married  Robert  D. 
Noleman,  of  CentraHa,  Illinois,  both  deceased;  Mariah  Elizabeth,  the 
mother  of  William  Jennings  Bryan;  America,  deceased,  who  married 
William  C.  Stites,  then  of  Marion  County,  Illinois;  Nancy,  who  mar- 
ried Dr.  James  A.  Davenport  and  lives  at  Salem,  Illinois;  Docia,  who 
married  A.  Van  Antwerp,  and  lives  at  Sedalia,  Missouri;  and  Zadock, 
who  lives  near  Walnut  Hill. 

Mariah  Elizabeth  Jennings  was  born  near  Walnut  Hill,  Illinois, 
May  24th,  1834.  She  attended  the  public  schools  of  the  neighborhood, 
and  when  nearly  grown  was  the  pupil  of  Silas  L.  Bryan,  who  was 
nearly  twelve  years  her  senior.  At  an  early  age  she  connected  herself 
with  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  which  was  the  church  of  her 


36  BIOGRAPHY. 

parents,  and  remained  a  member  until  about  1877,  when  she  united  with 
the  Baptist  Church,  at  Salem,  to  which  her  husband  belonged.  She 
was  a  woman  of  excellent  sense  and  superior  management.  Her  hus- 
band's frequent  absence  from  home  threw  upon  her  a  large  portion  of 
the  responsibility  for  the  care  and  discipline  of  the  family,  and  for  some 
years  after  his  death  her  entire  time  was  given  to  the  nurture  and  edu- 
cation of  the  five  minor  children.  When  the  boys  were  grown  she  re- 
moved from  the  farm  to  Salem,  and  became  an  active  worker  in  her 
church  and  in  societies  for  social  improvement.  She  always  took  a  deep 
interest  in  the  political  fortunes  of  her  son  William,  and  he  has  always 
felt  indebted  to  her  equally  with  his  father  for  counsel  and  instruction. 
She  lived  during  the  later  years  of  her  life  in  a  home  which  William 
bought  for  her  use  with  the  first  savings  from  his  Congressional  salary. 
After  a  lingering  illness,  which  she  bore  with  great  patience,  she  died 
on  the  27th  of  June,  1896,  and  was  laid  to  rest  by  the  side  of  her 
husband. 

To  Silas  Lillard  and  Mariah  Elizabeth  Bryan  were  born  nine  chil- 
dren. Of  these  Virginia,  John  and  Hiram  died  in  infancy.  Russell 
Jones,  born  June  12th,  1864,  died  at  the  age  of  17,  on  the  eve  of  his 
departure  for  college.     Five  children  are  now  living,  namely : 

Francis  Mariah,  born  March  i8th,  1858. 

William  Jennings,  born  March  19th,  i860. 

Charles  Wayland,  born  February  loth,  1867. 

Nancy  Lillard,  born  November  4th,  1869. 

Mary  Elizabeth,  bom  May  14th,  1872. 

Francis  M.  Bryan  (now  Baird),  lives  at  Salem,  Illinois,  and  Charles 
W.,  in  Lincoln,  Nebraska. 

The  Bryan,  Lillard,  Jennings  and  Davidson  families  all  belonged  to 
the  middle  classes.  They  were  industrious,  law-abiding.  God-fearing 
people.  No  member  of  the  family  ever  became  very  rich,  and  none 
were  ever  abjectly  poor.  Farming  has  been  the  occupation  of  the  ma- 
jority, while  others  have  followed  the  legal  and  medical  professions  and 
mercantile  pursuits. 

Boyhood. 
W^illiam  Jennings  Bryan  was  born  in  Salem,  Illinois,  March  19, 
i860.  He  was  sturdy,  round-limbed  and  fond  of  play.  There  is  a 
tradition  that  his  appetite,  which  has  since  been  a  constant  companion, 
developed  very  early.  The  pockets  of  his  first  trousers  were  always 
filled  with  bread,  which  he  kept  for  an  emergency.  One  of  the  mem- 
ories belonging  to  this  period  was  his  ambition  to  be  a  minister,  but 


BIOGRAPHY.  37 

this  soon  gave  place  to  determination  to  become  a  lawyer  "like  father." 
This  purpose  was  a  lasting  one,  and  his  education  was  directed  toward 
that  end. 

His  father  purchased  a  farm  of  five  hundred  acres,  one  mile  from 
the  village,  and  when  William  was  six  years  old  the  family  removed  to 
their  new  home.  Here  he  studied,  worked  and  played,  until  ten  years  of 
age,  his  mother  being  his  teacher.  He  learned  to  read  quite  early;  after 
committing  his  lessons  to  memory,  he  stood  upon  a  little  table  and 
spoke  them  to  his  mother.  This  was  his  first  recorded  effort  at  speech- 
making.  His  work  was  feeding  the  deer,  which  his  father  kept  in  a 
small  park,  helping  care  for  the  pigs  and  chickens,  in  short  the  variety 
of  work  known  as  "doing  chores."  His  favorite  sport  was  rabbit  hunt- 
ing with  dogs.  I  am  not  sure  that  these  expeditions  were  harmful  to 
the  game,  but  they  have  furnished  his  only  fund  of  adventure  for  the 
amusement  of  our  children. 

At  the  age  of  ten,  William  entered  the  public  school  at  Salem,  and 
during  his  five  years'  attendance,  was  not  an  especially  brilliant  pupil, 
though  he  never  failed  in  an  examination.  In  connection  with  his 
school,  he  developed  an  interest  in  the  work  of  literary  and  debating 
societies. 

His  father's  Congressional  campaign  in  1872  was  his  first  political 
awakening,  and  from  that  time  on  he  always  cherished  the  thought 
of  entering  public  life.  His  idea  was  to  first  win  a  reputation  and  se- 
cure a  competency  at  the  bar,  but  he  seized  the  unexpected  opportunity 
which  came  to  him  in  1890. 

At  fourteen  he  became  a  member  of  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
church.  Later,  he  joined  the  First  Presbyterian  church  at  Jackson- 
ville, Illinois,  and,  upon  our  removal  to  Nebraska,  brought  his  letter 
to  the  First  Presbyterian  church  of  Lincoln,  to  which  he  still  be- 
longs. It  may  not  be  amiss  at  this  point  to  quote  from  an  eulogy  which 
Mr.  Bryan  delivered  upon  a  colleague  in  the  Fifty-third  Congress. 
This  extract  will  serve  a  double  purpose,  in  that  it  gives  his  views  upon 
immortality,  and,  at  the  same  time,  presents  a  passage  which  I  think 
may  without  impropriety  be  called  a  finished  bit  of  English. 

I  shall  not  believe  that  even  now  his  light  is  extinguished.  If  the  Father 
deigns  to  touch  with  divine  power  the  cold  and  pulseless  heart  of  the  buried 
acorn,  and  make  it  burst  forth  from  its  prison  walls,  will  He  leave  neglected  in 
the  earth  the  soul  of  man,  who  was  made  in  the  image  of  his  Creator?  If  He 
stoops  to  give  to  the  rosebush,  whose  withered  blossoms  float  upon  the  breeze, 
the  sweet  assurance  of  another  springtime,  will  He  withhold  the  words  of  hope 
from  the  sons  of  men  when  the  frosts  of  winter  come?  If  Matter,  mute  and  in- 
animate, though  changed  by  the  forces  of  Nature  into  a  multitude  of  forms, 


38  ■  BIOGRAPHY. 

r 

can  never  die,  will  the  imperial  spirit  of  man  suffer  annihilation  after  it  has  paid 
a  brief  visit,  like  a  royal  guest,  to  this  tenement  of  clay? 

Rather  let  us  believe  that  He  who,  in  His  apparent  prodigality,  wastes  not 
the  raindrop,  the  blade  of  grass,  or  the  evening's  sighing  zephyr,  but  makes 
them  all  to  carry  out  His  eternal  plans,  has  given  immortality  to  the  mortal, 
and  gathered  to  Himself  the  generous  spirit  of  our  friend. 

Instead  of  mourning,  let  us  look  up  and  address  him  in  the  words  of  the 
poet: 

"Thy  day  has  come,  not  gone; 

Thy  sun  has  risen,  not  set; 

Thy  life  is  now  beyond 

The  reach  of  death  or  change, 

Not  ended — but  begun. 

O,  noble  soul!    O,  gentle  heart!    Hail,  and  farewell." 

G>IIege  Life. 

At  fifteen  he  entered  Whipple  Academy,  the  preparatory  depart- 
ment of  IlHnois  College,  at  Jacksonville,  Illinois,  and  with  this  step  a 
changed  life  began.  Vacations  found  him  at  home,  but  for  eight  years 
he  led  the  life  of  a  student,  and  then  took  up  the  work  of  his  profession. 
Six  years  of  his  school  life  were  spent  in  Jacksonville,  in  the  home  of 
Dr.  Hiram  K.  Jones,  a  relative.  The  atmosphere  of  this  home  had  its 
influence  upon  the  growing  lad.  Dr.  Jones  is  a  man  of  strong  character, 
of  scholarly  tastes,  and  of  high  ideals,  and  during  the  existence  of  the 
Concord  school  was  a  lecturer  upon  Platonic  Philosophy.  His  wife, 
too,  was  a  woman  of  rare  attainments,  and  having  no  children,  they 
gave  the  youth  a  home  in  the  fullest  sense  of  that  word. 

His  parents  wished  him  to  take  a  classical  course  and  while  some- 
times grumbling  over  his  Latin  and  Greek,  he  has  since  recognized  the 
wisdom  of  their  choice.  Of  these  two  languages,  Latin  was  his  favorite. 
He  had  a  strong  preference  for  mathematics,  and  especially  for  geom- 
etry, and  has  believed  that  the  mental  discipline  acquired  in  this 
study  has  since  been  useful  in  argument.  He  was,  too,  an  earnest 
student  of  political  economy.  This  entrance  into  college  life  brings  to 
mind  an  incident  which  shows  both  the  young  man's  rapid  growth 
and  his  father's  practical  views.  During  the  first  year  of  his  absence, 
he  discovered,  as  holidays  drew  near,  that  his  trousers  were  becoming 
too  short,  and  wrote  home  for  money  to  buy  a  new  pair.  His  father 
responded  that  as  it  was  so  near  vacation  he  need  not  make  any  pur- 
chase until  he  reached  home,  and  added:  "My  son,  you  may  as  well 
learn  now,  that  people  will  measure  you  by  the  length  of  your  head, 
rather  than  by  the  length  of  your  breeches." 


BIOGRAPHY.  39 

As  to  college  athletics,  he  played  very  little  at  baseball  or  at  foot- 
ball, but  was  fond  of  foot-racing  and  of  jumping.  Three  years  after 
graduation  on  Osage  Orange  Day,  he  won  a  medal  for  the  broad 
or  standing  jump,  in  a  contest  open  to  students  and  to  alumni.  The 
medal  records  twelve  feet  and  four  inches  as  the  distance  covered. 

A  prize  contest  always  fired  William's  ambition.  It  may  interest 
the  boys  who  read  these  pages  to  know  of  his  record  on  this  point,  and 
to  note  his  gradual  rise.  During  his  first  year  at  the  Academy  he 
declaimed  Patrick  Henry's  masterpiece  and  not  only  failed  to  win  a 
prize,  but  ranked  well  down  in  the  list.  Nothing  daunted,  the  second 
year  found  him  again  entered  with  "The  Palmetto  and  the  Pine"  as 
his  subject.  This  time  he  ranked  third.  The  next  year,  when  a 
Freshman,  he  tried  for  a  prize  in  Latin  prose,  and  won  half  of  the 
second  prize.  Later  in  the  year,  he  declaimed  "Bernardo  del  Carpio," 
and  gained  the  second  prize.  In  his  Sophomore  year  he  entered  another 
contest,  with  an  essay  on  the  not  altogether  novel  subject,  "Labor." 
This  time  the  first  prize  rewarded  his  work.  An  oration  upon  "In- 
dividual Powers"  gave  him  the  first  prize  in  the  Junior  year.  A 
part  of  this  prize  was  a  volume  of  Bryant's  poems.  Mr.  Bryan  gave 
me  this  book,  his  first  gift,  because  it  contained  his  favorite  poem, 
an  ode  to  a  waterfowl,  which  concludes: 

He  who,  from  zone  to  zone, 

Guides  through  the  boundless  sky  thy  certain  flight, 

In  the  long  way  that  I  must  tread  alone, 

Will   lead   my   steps   aright. 

The  winning  of  the  Junior  prize  entitled  him  to  represent  Illinois 
College  in  the  intercollegiate  oratorical  contest  which  was  held  at 
Galesburg,  Illinois,  in  the  fall  of  1880.  His  oration  was  upon  "Justice." 
and  was  awarded  the  second  prize  of  fifty  dollars.  Gen.  John  C. 
Black,  of  Illinois,  was  one  of  the  judges  in  this  contest  and  marked  Mr. 
Bryan  one  hundred  on  delivery.  Upon  invitation  of  Mr.  Black,  the 
young  man  called  at  the  hotel  and  received  many  valuable  suggestions 
upon  the  art  of  speaking.  At  the  time  of  graduation  he  was  elected 
class  orator  by  his  class,  and,  having  the  highest  rank  in  scholarship 
during  the  four  years'  course,  delivered  the  valedictory.  Upon  enter- 
ing the  academy,  he  joined  the  Sigma  Pi  society,  and  was  an  active 
member  for  six  years,  profiting  much  by  the  training  in  essay,  decla- 
mation and  debate. 

My  personal  knowledge  of  Mr.  Bryan  dates  from  September,  1879. 
He  was  then  entering  upon  his  Junior  year.  At  the  risk  of  depart- 
ing from  the  purpose  of  this  biography,  I  shall  speak  of  my  first  im- 


40  BIOGRAPHY. 

pressions.  I  saw  him  first  in  the  parlors  of  the  young  ladies'  school 
which  I  attended  in  Jacksonville.  He  entered  the  room  with  several 
other  students,  was  taller  than  the  rest,  and  attracted  my  attention  at 
once.  His  face  was  pale  and  thin;  a  pair  of  keen,  dark  eyes  looked 
out  from  beneath  heavy  brows;  his  nose  was  prominent — too  large  to 
look  well,  I  thought;  a  broad,  thin-lipped  mouth  and  a  square  chin, 
completed  the  contour  of  his  face.  He  was  neat,  though  not  fastidious 
in  dress,  and  stood  firmly  and  with  dignity.  I  noted  particularly  his 
hair  and  his  smile.  The  former,  black  in  color,  fine  in  quality,  and 
parted  distressingly  straight;  the  latter,  expansive  and  expressive.  In 
later  years  this  smile  has  been  the  subject  of  considerable  comment, 
but  the  well-rounded  cheeks  of  Mr.  Bryan  now  check  its  onward  march, 
and  no  one  has  seen  the  real  breadth  of  the  smile  who  did  not  see 
it  in  the  early  days.  Upon  one  occasion,  a  heartless  observer  was 
heard  to  remark,  "That  man  can  whisper  in  his  own  ear,"  but  this 
was  a  cruel  exaggeration. 

During  the  summer  of  1880,  Mr.  Bryan  attended  his  first  political 
meeting.  I  record  the  details  of  this  gathering  for  the  encouragement 
of  young  speakers.  He  was  to  make  a  Democratic  speech  at  a  farm- 
er's picnic  near  Salem,  and  the  bills  announced  two  other  speakers, 
Mr.  Bryan  standing  third  upon  the  list.  Upon  reaching  the  grove,  he 
found  the  two  speakers  and  an  audience  of  four,  namely,  the  owner  of 
the  grove,  one  man  in  control  of  a  wheel  of  fortune,  and  two  men  in 
charge  of  a  lemonade  stand.  After  waiting  an  hour  for  an  audience 
which  failed  to  come,  the  meeting  adjourned  sine  die,  and  Mr.  Bryan 
went  home.  Later  in  the  fall,  however,  he  made  four  speeches  for 
Hancock  and  EngHsh,  the  first  being  delivered  in  the  court  house  at 
Salem. 

The  graduating  exercises  of  Illinois  College  occurred  in  June, 
1881.  Mr.  Bryan's  oration  and  valedictory  address  are  given  below, 
not  because  they  posses  great  literary  merit,  but  in  order  to  show 
his  style  and  the  trend  of  his  mind  at  that  time. 

Graduating  Oration.     Subject:  Character. 

It  is  said  of  the  ermine  that  it  will  suffer  capture  rather  than  allow  pollution 
to  touch  its  glossy  coat,  but  take  away  that  coat  and  the  animal  is  worthless. 

We  have  ermines  in  higher  life — those  who  love  display.  The  desire  to  seem, 
rather  than  to  be,  is  one  of  the  faults  which  our  age,  as  well  as  other  ages,  must 
deplore. 

Appearance  too  often  takes  the  place  of  reality — the  stamp  of  the  coin  is 
there,  and  the  glitter  of  the  gold,  but,  after  all,  it  is  but  a  worthless  wash. 
Sham  is  carried  into  every  department  of  life,  and  we  are  being  corrupted  by 


RUTH   BAIRD   BRYAN. 


Biography.  43 

^ow  and  surface.  We  are  too  apt  to  judge  people  by  what  they  have,  rather 
than  by  what  they  are;  we  have  too  few  Hamlets  who  are  bold  enough  to  pro- 
claim, "I  know  not  seem!" 

The  counterfeit,  however,  only  proves  the  value  of  the  coin,  and,  although 
reputation  may  in  some  degree  be  taking  the  place  of  character,  yet  the  latter 
has  lost  none  of  its  worth,  and,  now,  as  of  old,  is  a  priceless  gem,  wherever 
found.  Its  absence  and  presence,  alike,  prove  its  value.  Have  you  not  con- 
versed with  those  whose  brilliant  wit,  pungent  sarcasm  and  well-framed  sen- 
tences failed  to  conceal  a  certain  indescribable  something  which  made  you  dis- 
trust every  word  they  uttered?  Have  you  not  listened  to  those  whose  elo- 
quence dazzled,  whose  pretended  earnestness  enkindled  in  you  an  enthusiasm 
equal  to  their  own,  and  yet,  have  you  not  felt  that  behind  all  this  there  was 
lurking  a  monster  that  repelled  the  admiration  which  their  genius  attracted? 
Are  there  not  those,  whom  like  the  Greeks  we  fear,  even  when  they  are  bring- 
ing gifts?  That  something  is  want  of  character,  or,  to  speak  more  truly,  the 
possession  of  bad  character,  and  it  shows  itself  alike  in  nations  and  individuals. 

Eschines  was  talented;  his  oration  against  the  crowning  of  Demosthenes 
was  a  masterly  production,  excellently  arranged,  elegantly  written  and  efTec- 
tively  delivered,  so  extraodinary  was  its  merits,  that,  when  he  afterward,  as  an 
exile,  delivered  it  before  a  Roadian  audience,  they  expressed  their  astonishment 
that  it  had  not  won  for  him  his  cause,  but  it  fell  like  a  chilling  blast  upon  his 
hearers  at  Athens,  because  he  was  the  "hireling  of  Philip." 

Napoleon  swept  like  a  destroying  angel  over  almost  the  entire  eastern 
world,  evincing  a  military  genius  unsurpassed,  skill  marvelous  in  its  perfection, 
and  a  courage  which  savored  almost  of  rashness,  yet  ever  demonstrated  the 
wisdom  of  its  dictates.  For  a  while  he  seemed  to  have  robbed  fortune  of  her 
secret,  and  bewildered  nations  gazed  in  silence  while  he  turned  the  streams  of 
success  according  to  his  vascillating  whims. 

Although  endowed  with  a  perception  keen  enough  to  discern  the  hidden 
plans  of  opposing  generals,  he  could  but  see  one  road  to  immortality — a  path 
which  led  through  battle-fields  and  marshes  wet  with  human  gore;  over  rivers 
of  blood  and  streams  of  tears  that  flowed  from  orphans'  eyes — a  path  along 
whose  length  the  widow's  wail  made  music  for  his  marching  hosts.  But  he  is 
fallen,  and  over  his  tomb  no  mourner  weeps.  Talent,  genius,  power,  these  he 
had — character,  he  had  none. 

But  there  are  those  who  have  both  influence  through  life  and  unending 
praises  after  death;  there  are  those  who  have  by  their  ability,  inspired  the  admi- 
ration of  the  people  and  held  it  by  the  purity  of  their  character.  It  is  often 
remarked  that  some  men  have  a  name  greater  than  their  works  will  justify; 
the  secret  lies  in  the  men  themselves. 

It  was  his  well-known  character,  not  less  than  his  eloquent  words;  his  deep 
convictions,  not  less  than  the  fire  of  his  utterance;  his  own  patriotism,  not 
less  than  his  invectives  against  the  Macedonian  that  brought  to  the  lips  of  the 
reanimated  Greeks  that  memorable  sentence,  "Let  us  go  against  Philip." 

Perhaps  we  could  not  find  better  illustratione  of  the  power  and  worth  of 
character  than  are  presented  in  the  lives  of  two  of  our  own  countrymen — names 
about  which  cluster  in  most  sacred  nearness  the  affections  of  the  American  peo- 
ple— honored  dust  over  which  have  fallen  the  truest  tears  of  sorrow  ever  shed 


44  BIOGRAPHY. 

by  a  nation  for  its  heroes — the  father  and  savior  of  their  common  country — the 
one,  the  appointed  guardian  of  its  birth;  the  other,  the  preserver  of  its  life. 

Both  were  reared  by  the  hand  of  Providence  for  the  work  entrusted  to  their 
care,  both  were  led  by  nature  along  the  rugged  path  of  poverty;  both  formed 
a  character  whose  foundations  were  laid  broad  and  deep  in  the  purest  truths  of 
morality — a  character  which  stood  unshaken  amid  the  terrors  of  war  and  the 
tranquillity  of  peace;  a  character  which  allowed  neither  cowardice  upon  the 
battle-field  nor  tyranny  in  the  presidential  chair.  Thus  did  they  win  the  hearts 
of  their  countrymen  and  prepare  for  themselves  a  lasting  place  of  rest  in  the 
tender  memories  of  a  grateful  people. 

History  but  voices  our  own  experience  when  it  awards  to  true  nobility  of 
character  the  highest  place  among  the  enviable  possessions  of  man. 

Nor  is  it  the  gift  of  fortune.  In  this,  at  least,  we  are  not  creatures  of  cir- 
cumstances; talent,  special  genius  may  be  the  gift  of  nature;  position  in  society 
the  gift  of  birth;  respect  may  be  bought  with  wealth;  but  neither  one  nor  all  of 
these  can  give  character.  It  is  a  slow  but  sure  growth  to  which  every  thought 
and  action  lends  its  aid.  To  form  character  is  to  form  grooves  in  which  are 
to  flow  the  purposes  of  our  lives.  It  is  to  adopt  principles  which  are  to  be  the 
measure  of  our  actions,  the  criteria  of  our  deeds.  This  we  are  doing  each  day, 
either  consciously  or  unconsciously.  There  is  character  formed  by  our  associ- 
ation with  each  friend,  by  every  aspiration  of  the  heart,  by  every  object  toward 
which  our  affections  go  out,  yea,  by  every  thought  that  flies  on  its  lightning 
wing  through  the  dark  recesses  of  the  brain. 

It  is  a  law  of  mind  that  it  acts  most  readily  in  familiar  paths,  hence,  repeti- 
tion forms  habit,  and  almost  before  we  are  aware,  we  are  chained  to  a  certain 
routine  of  action  from  which  it  is  difficult  to  free  ourselves.  We  imitate  that 
which  we  admire.  If  we  revel  in  stories  of  blood,  and  are  pleased  with  the 
sight  of  barbaric  cruelty,  we  find  it  easy  to  become  a  Caligula  or  a  Domitian; 
we  picture  to  ourselves  scenes  of  cruelty  in  which  we  are  actors,  and  soon 
await  only  the  opportunity  to  vie  in  atrocity  with  the  Neroes  of  the  past. 

If  we  delight  in  gossip,  and  are  not  content  unless  each  neighbor  is  laid 
upon  the  dissecting  table,  we  form  a  character  unenviable  indeed,  and  must 
be  willing  to  bear  the  contempt  of  all  the  truly  good,  while  we  roll  our  bit 
of  scandal  as  a  sweet  morsel  under  the  tongue. 

But  if  each  day  we  gather  some  new  truths,  plant  ourselves  more  firmly 
upon  principles  which  are  eternal,  guard  every  thought  and  action,  that  it  may 
be  pure,  and  conform  our  lives  more  nearly  to  that  Perfect  Model,  we  shall 
form  a  character  that  will  be  a  fit  background  on  which  to  paint  the  noblest 
deeds  and  the  grandest  intellectual  and  moral  achievements;  a  character  that 
cannot  be  concealed,  but  which  will  bring  success  in  this  life  and  form  the 
best  preparation  for  that  which  is  beyond. 

The  formation  of  character  is  a  work  which  continues  through  life,  but  at 
no  time  is  it  so  active  as  in  youth  and  early  manhood.  At  this  time  impres- 
sions are  most  easily  made,  and  mistakes  most  easily  corrected.  It  is  the  sea- 
son for  the  sowing  of  the  seed — the  springtime  of  life.  There  is  no  complaint 
in  the  natural  world  because  each  fruit  and  herb  brings  forth  after  its  kind; 
there  is  no  complaint  if  a  neglected  seed-time  brings  a  harvest  of  want;  there 
is  no  cry  of  injustice  if  thistles  spring  from  thistle-seed  sown.     As  little  reason 


Biography.  45 

have  we  to  murmur  if  in  after-life  we  discover  a  character  dwarfed  and  de- 
formed by  the  evil  thoughts  and  actions  of  today;  as  little  reason  have  we  to 
impeach  the  wisdom  of  God  if  our  wild  oats,  as  they  are  called  in  palliation, 
leave  scars  upon  our  manhood,  which  years  of  reform  fail  to  wear  away. 

Character  is  the  entity,  the  individuality  of  the  person,  shining  from  every 
window  of  the  soul,  either  as  a  beam  of  purity,  or  as  a  clouded  ray  that  be- 
trays the  impurity  within.  The  contest  between  light  and  darkness,  right 
and  wrong,  goes  on;  day  by  day,  hour  by  hour,  moment  by  moment,  our 
characters  are  being  formed,  and  this  is  the  all-important  question  which 
comes  to  us  in  accents  ever  growing  fainter  as  we  journey  from  the  cradle 
to  the  grave,  "Shall  those  characters  be  good  or  bad?" 

Valedictory. 

Beloved  instructors,  it  is  character  not  less  than  intellect  that  you  have 
striven  to  develop.  As  we  stand  at  the  end  of  our  college  course,  and  turn  our 
eyes  toward  the  scenes  forever  past — as  our  memories  linger  on  the  words  of 
wisdom  which  have  fallen  from  your  lips,  we  are  more  and  more  deeply  im- 
pressed with  the  true  conception  of  duty  which  you  have  ever  shown.  You 
have  sought  not  to  trim  the  lamp  of  genius  until  the  light  of  morality  is 
paled  by  its  dazzling  brilliance,  but  to  encourage  and  strengthen  both.  These 
days  are  over.  No  longer  shall  we  listen  to  your  warning  voices,  no  more 
meet  you  in  these  familiar  class-rooms,  yet  on  our  hearts  "deeply  has  sunk 
the  lesson"  you  have  given,  and  shall  not  soon  depart. 

We  thank  you  for  your  kind  and  watchful  care,  and  shall  ever  cherish 
your  teachings  with  that  devotion  which  sincere  gratitude  inspires. 

It  is  fitting  that  we  express  to  you  also,  honored  trustees,  our  gratitude  for 
the  privileges  which  you  have  permitted  us  to  enjoy. 

The  name  of  the  institution  whose  interests  you  guard,  will  ever  be  dear 
to  us  as  the  school-room,  to  whose  influence  we  shall  trace  whatever  success 
coming  years  may  bring. 

Dear  class-mates,  my  lips  refuse  to  bid  you  a  last  good-bye;  we  have  so 
long  been  joined  together  in  a  community  of  aims  and  interests;  so  often  met 
and  mingled  our  thoughts  in  confidential  friendship;  so  often  planned  and 
worked  together,  that  it  seems  like  rending  asunder  the  very  tissues  of  the 
heart  to  separate  us  now. 

But  this  long  and  happy  association  is  at  an  end,  and  now  as  we  go  forth 
in  sorrow,  as  each  one  must,  to  begin  alone  the  work  which  lies  before  us,  let 
us  encourage  each  other  with  strengthening  words. 

Success  is  brought  by  continued  labor  and  continued  watchfulness.  We 
must  struggle  on,  not  for  one  moment  hesitate,  nor  take  one  backward  step; 
for  in  language  of  the  poet — 

The  gates  of  hell  are  open  night  and  day. 
Smooth  the  descent  and  easy  is  the  way; 
But  to  return  and  view  the  cheerful  skies. 
In  this,  the  past  and  mighty  labor  lies. 

We  launch  our  vessels  upon  the  uncertain  sea  of  life  alone,  yet,  not  alone, 
for  around  us  are  friends  who  anxiously  and  prayerfully  watch  our  course.  They 
will  rejoice  if  we  arrive  safely  at  our  respective  havens,  or  weep  with  bitter 


46  BIOGRAPHY. 

tears,  if,  one  by  one,  our  weather-beaten  barks  are  lost  forever  in  the  surges 
of  the  deep. 

We  have  esteemed  each  other,  loved  each  other,  and  now  must  with  each 
other  part.  God  grant  that  we  may  all  so  live  as  to  meet  in  the  better  world, 
where  parting  is  unknown. 

Halls  of  learning,  fond  Alma  Mater,  farewell.  We  turn  to  take  one  "last, 
long,  lingering  look"  at  thy  receding  walls.  We  leave  thee  now  to  be  ush- 
ered out  into  the  varied  duties  of  an  active  life. 

However  high  our  names  may  be  inscribed  upon  the  gilded  scroll  of 
fame,  to  thee  we  all  the  honor  give,  to  thee  all  praises  bring.  And  when,  in 
after  years,  we're  wearied  by  the  bustle  of  a  busy  world,  our  hearts  will  often 
long  to  turn  and  seek  repose  beneath  thy  sheltering  shade. 

When  fall  came,  he  entered  the  Union  College  of  Law  at  Chicago. 
Out  of  school  hours  his  time  was  spent  in  the  office  of  ex-Senator 
Lyman  Trumbull,  who  had  been  a  political  friend  of  Mr.  Bryan's 
father.  This  acquaintance,  together  with  the  fact  that  a  warm 
friendship  existed  between  Mr.  Bryan  and  his  law  school  classmate, 
Henry  Trumbull,  the  judge's  son,  led  to  the  establishment  of  a  second 
foster  home — a  home  in  which  he  and  his  family  have  ever  found  a 
cordial  welcome.  In  this  home,  but  lately  bereft  of  its  head,  he  spent 
his  first  Sabbath  after  the  Democratic  National  Convention. 

Mr.  Bryan  stood  well  in  law  school,  taking  an  especial  interest  in 
constitutional  law.  Here  again,  he  was  connected  with  the  debating 
society  of  the  college,  and  took  an  active  part  in  its  meetings.  At 
graduation,  his  thesis  was  a  defense  of  the  jury  system.  His  first 
fee  was  earned  in  the  County  Court  at  Salem. 

To  these  years  of  study  belong  many  things  which  are  of  interest 
to  us,  but  which  are  too  trivial  for  the  public  eye.  I  shall  venture 
upon  one,  however.  Many  people  have  remarked  upon  the  fondness 
which  Mr.  Bryan  shows  for  quoting  Scripture.  This  habit  is  one 
of  long  standing,  as  the  following  circumstance  shows.  The  time  came 
when  it  seemed  proper  to  have  a  little  conversation  with  my  father  and 
this  was  something  of  an  ordeal,  as  father  is  rather  a  reserved  man. 
In  his  dilemma,  William  sought  refuge  in  the  Scriptures,  and  began: 
"Mr.  Baird,  I  have  been  reading  Proverbs  a  good  deal  lately,  and 
find  that  Solomon  says:  'Whoso  findeth  a  wife,  findeth  a  good  thing, 
and  obtaineth  favour  of  the  Lord!'"  Father,  being  something  of  a 
Bible  scholar  himself,  replied:  "Yes,  I  believe  Solomon  did  say  that, 
but  Paul  suggests  that,  while  he  that  marrieth  doeth  well,  he  that 
marrieth  not  doeth  better."  This  was  disheartening,  but  the  young 
man  saw  his  way  through.  "Solomon  would  be  the  best  authority 
upon  this  point,"  he  rejoined,  "because  Paul  was  never  married,  while 


BIOGRAPHY.  47 

Solomon  had  a  number  of  wives."    After  this  friendly  tilt  the  matter 

was  satisfactorily  arranged. 

A  Lawyer. 

On  July  4,  1883,  Mr.  Bryan  began  the  practice  of  his  profession  in 
Jacksonville,  Illinois.  Desk  room  was  obtained  in  the  office  of  Brown 
&  Kirby,  one  of  the  leading  firms  in  the  city,  and  the  struggle  en- 
countered by  all  young  professional  men  began.  The  first  six  months 
were  rather  trying  to  his  patience,  and  he  was  compelled  to  sup- 
plement his  earnings  by  a  small  draft  upon  his  father's  estate.  Toward 
the  close  of  the  year,  he  entered  into  correspondence  with  his  former 
law  school  classmate,  Henry  Trumbull,  then  located  at  Albuquerque, 
New  Mexico,  and  discussed  with  him  the  advisability  of  removing 
to  that  territory.  After  the  ist  of  January,  however,  cUents  became 
more  numerous,  and  he  felt  encouraged  to  make  Jacksonville  his 
permanent  home.  Tlie  following  spring  he  took  charge  of  the  col- 
lection department  of  Brown  &  Kirby's  office,  and  in  a  little  more  than 
a  year  his  income  seemed  large  enough  to  support  two.  During  the 
summer  of  1884,  a  modest  home  was  planned  and  built,  and  on 
October  i,  1884,  we  were  married. 

During  the  next  three  years  we  lived  comfortably,  though  econom- 
ically, and  laid  by  a  small  amount.  Politics  lost  none  of  its  charms, 
and  each  campaign  found  Mr.  Bryan  speakino^,  usually  in  our  own 
county. 

Three  years  after  graduation,  he  attended  the  commencement 
at  Illinois  College,  delivered  the  Master's  oration,  and  received 
the  degree.    His  subject  on  that  occasion  was  "American  Citizenship." 

In  the  summer  of  1887,  legal  business  called  him  to  Kansas  and 
Iowa,  and  a  Sabbath  was  spent  in  Lincoln,  Nebraska,  with  a  law 
school  classmate,  Mr.  A.  R.  Talbot.  Mr.  Bryan  was  greatly  im- 
pressed with  the  beauty  and  business  enterprise  of  Lincoln,  and  with 
the  advantages  which  a  growing  capital  furnishes  for  a  young  law- 
yer. He  returned  to  Illinois  full  of  enthusiasm  for  the  West,  and  per- 
fected plans  for  our  removal  thither.  No  political  ambitions  entered 
into  this  change  of  residence,  as  the  city,  county  and  state  were 
strongly  Republican.  He  arrived  in  Lincoln,  October  i,  1887,  and 
a  partnership  was  formed  with  Mr.  Talbot.  As  Mr.  Bryan  did  not 
share  in  the  salary  which  Mr.  Talbot  received  as  a  railroad  attorney,  he 
had  to  begin  again  at  the  bottom  of  the  ladder.  During  this  winter 
Ruth  and  I  remained  in  Jacksonville,  and  in  the  spring  following  a 
second  house  was  built — the  one  we  now  occupy — and  the  family  was 
reunited  in  its  Western  home.    The  practice  again  became  sufficient 


48  BIOGRAPHY. 

for  our  needs,  and  during  the  three  years  which  followed  we  were 
again  able  to  add  to  our  reserve  fund.  I  might  here  suggest  an  answer 
to  a  hostile  criticism,  namely,  that  Mr.  Bryan  did  not  distinguish  him- 
self as  a  lawyer.  Those  who  thus  complain  should  consider  that  he 
entered  the  practice  at  twenty-three  and  left  it  at  thirty,  and  during 
that  period  began  twice,  and  twice  became  more  than  self-supporting. 
At  the  time  of  his  election  to  Congress  his  practice  was  in  a  thriving 
condition,  and  fully  equal  to  that  of  any  man  of  his  age  in  the  city. 
Mr.  Bryan  often  met  such  demands  as  are  commonly  made  upon  law- 
yers in  the  way  of  short  addresses,  toasts,  etc.  Some  of  this  post- 
prandial oratory  discussed  questions  of  public  importance.  The  fol- 
lowing was  a  toast  upon  "The  Law  and  the  Gospel,"  delivered  at  a 
banquet  given  by  the  St.  Paul  Methodist  church  of  Lincoln,  in  honor 
of  some  distinguished  visitors : 

The  Law  and  the  GospeL    At  a  Methodist  Church  Banquet. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  It  is  rather  by  accident  than  by 
design  that  this  sentiment  has  fallen  to  me.  Had  not  my  law  partner  been 
called  unexpectedly  from  the  State  he  would  have  responded  with  more  propri- 
ety and  more  ability  to  'The  Law  and  the  Gospel." 

These  are  important  words;  each  covers  a  wide  field  by  itself  and  together 
they  include  all  government.  There  is  not  between  them,  as  some  suppose, 
a  wide  gulf  fixed.  Many  have  commenced  with  us  only  to  be  called  to  a  higher 
sphere,  and  a  few  ministers  have  come  to  us  when  they  were  convinced  that  they 
had  answered  to  another's  call. 

In  the  earlier  days  the  prophet  was  also  the  lawgiver.  He  who  wore  the 
priestly  robe  held  in  his  hands  the  scales  of  justice.  But  times  are  changed. 
For  the  good  of  the  State  and  for  the  welfare  of  the  church,  the  moral  and  the 
civil  law  have  been  separated.  Today  we  owe  a  double  allegiance,  and  "render 
unto  Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's,  and  unto  God  the  things  that  are 
God's."  Their  governments  are  concentric  circles  and  can  never  interfere. 
Between  what  religion  commands  and  what  the  law  compels  there  is,  and  ever 
must  be,  a  wide  margin,  as  there  is  also  between  what  religion  forbids  and  what 
the  law  prohibits.  In  many  things  we  are  left  to  obey  or  disobey  the  instruc- 
tions of  the  Divine  Ruler,  answerable  to  Him  only  for  our  conduct.  The  gos- 
pel deals  with  the  secret  purposes  of  the  heart  as  well  as  with  the  outward  life, 
while  the  civil  law  must  content  itself  with  restraining  the  arm  outstretched 
for  another's  hurt  or  with  punishing  the  actor  after  the  injury  is  done. 

Next  to  the  ministry  I  know  of  no  more  noble  profession  than  the  law. 
The  object  aimed  at  is  justice,  equal  and  exact,  and  if  it  does  not  reach  that 
end  at  once  it  is  because  the  stream  is  diverted  by  selfishness  or  checked  by 
ignorance.  Its  principles  ennoble  and  its  practice  elevates.  If  you  point  to  the 
pettifogger,  I  will  answer  that  he  is  as  much  out  of  place  in  the  temple  of  justice 
as  is  the  hypocrite  in  the  house  of  God.  You  will  find  the  "book  on  tricks"  in 
the  library  of  the  legal  bankrupt — nowhere  else.     In  no  business  in  life  do 


BIOGRAPHY.  49 

honesty,  truthfulness  and  uprightness  of  conduct  pay  a  larger  dividend  upon 
the  investment  than  in  the  law.  He  is  not  only  blind  to  his  highest  welfare 
and  to  his  greatest  good,  but  also  treading  upon  dangerous  ground,  who  fancies 
that  mendacity,  loquacity  and  pertinacity  are  the  only  accomplishments  of  a 
successful  lawyer. 

You  cannot  judge  a  man's  life  by  the  success  of  a  moment,  by  the  victory 
of  an  hour,  or  even  by  the  results  of  a  year.  You  must  view  his  life  as  a  whole. 
You  must  stand  where  you  can  see  the  man  as  he  treads  the  entire  path  that 
leads  from  the  cradle  to  the  grave — now  crossing  the  plain,  now  climbing  the 
steeps,  now  passing  through  pleasant  fields,  now  wending  his  way  with  diffi- 
culty between  rugged  rocks — tempted,  tried,  tested,  triumphant.  The  com- 
pleted life  of  every  lawyer,  either  by  its  success  or  failure,  emphasizes  the  words 
of  Solomon — "The  path  of  the  just  is  as  a  shining  light  that  shineth  more  and 
more  unto  the  perfect  day." 

By  practicing  upon  the  highest  plane  the  lawyer  may  not  win  the  greatest 
wealth,  but  he  wins  that  which  wealth  cannot  purchase  and  is  content  to  know 
and  feel  that  "a  good  name  is  rather  to  be  chosen  than  great  riches;  and  loving 
favor  rather  than  silver  and  gold." 

There  are  pioneers  of  the  gospel  whose  names  you  speak  with  reverence, 
Calvin,  Knox,  the  Wesleys  and  Asbury,  besides  many  still  living,  and  you  love 
them  not  without  cause.  There  are  those  in  our  profession  whom  we  delight 
to  honor.  Justinian  and  Coke,  Blackstone  and  Jay,  Marshall  and  Kent,  Story 
and  Lincoln,  men  who  have  stood  in  the  thickest  of  the  fightt  have  met  every 
temptation  peculiar  to  our  profession,  and  yet  maintained  their  integrity. 

It  is  a  fact  to  which  we  point  with  no  little  pride,  that  with  a  history  of  an 
hundred  years  no  member  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  has  ever 
been  charged  with  corrupt  action,  although  untold  millions  have  been  involved 
in  the  litigation  before  the  court.  Nor  do  I  now  recall  any  member  of  the 
supreme  court  of  any  State  who  has  been  convicted  of  misusing  his  office. 

"The  Law  and  the  Gospel."  Great  in  their  honored  names,  great  in  their 
history,  great  in  their  influence.  To  a  certain  extent  they  supplement  each 
other.  The  law  asks  of  the  gospel  counsel,  not  commands.  The  gospel  goes 
far  beyond  the  reach  of  law,  for  while  the  law  must  cease  to  operate  when  its 
subject  dies,  the  gospel  crosses  the  dark  river  of  death  and  lightens  up  the 
world  which  lies  beyond  the  tomb.  The  law  is  negative,  the  gospel  positive; 
the  law  says  "do  not  unto  others  that  which  you  would  not  have  others  do  unto 
you,"  while  the  gospel  declares  that  we  should  "do  to  others  that  which  we 
would  that  others  should  do  unto  us." 

"The  Law  and  the  Gospel."  They  form  an  exception  to  the  rule  that  in 
union  there  is  strength,  for  each  is  strongest  when  alone.  And  I  believe  that 
the  greatest  prosperity  of  the  State  and  greatest  growth  of  the  church  will  be 
found  when  the  law  and  the  gospel  walk,  not  hand  in  hand,  but  side  by  side. 

In  Politics. 

Mr.  Bryan  became  actively  connected  with  the  Democratic  or- 
ganization in  Nebraska  immediately  after  coming  to  the  State,  his 
first  political  speech  being  made  at  Seward  in  the  spring  of  1888, 


50  BIOGRAPHY. 

Soon  afterward  he  went  as  a  delegate  to  the  State  convention;  this 
gave  him  an  acquaintance  with  the  leading  Democrats  of  the  State 
and  resulted  in  a  series  of  speeches.  He  made  a  canvass  of  the  First 
Congressional  district  that  fall  in  behalf  of  Hon.  J.  Sterling  Morton,  and 
also  visited  some  thirty  counties  throughout  the  State.  Mr.  Morton 
was  defeated  by  thirty-four  hundred,  the  district  being  normally  re- 
publican. 

When  the  campaign  of  1890  opened,  there  seemed  small  hope  of 
carrying  the  district  and  there  was  but  little  rivalry  for  the  nomination. 
Mr.  Bryan  was  selected  without  -opposition,  and  at  once  began  a  vigor- 
ous campaign.  An  invitation  to  joint  debcRo-was  issued  by  his  com- 
mittee and  accepted  by  his  opponent,  Hon.  W.  J.  Connell,  of  Omaha, 
who  then  represented  the  district.  These  debates  excited  attention 
throughout  the  State.  I  have  always  regarded  the  first  debate  of  this 
series  as  marking  an  important  epoch  in  Mr.  Bryan's  life.  The  meet- 
ing took  place  in  Lincoln.  I  had  never  before  seen  Mr.  Bryan  so  pre- 
occupied and  so  intent  on  making  his  eflfort  acceptable.  He  had  the 
opening  and  the  closing  speeches.  The  hall  was  packed  with  friends 
of  both  candidates  and  applause  was  quite  evenly  divided  until  the 
closing  speech.  I  dare  not  describe  this  scene  as  it  stands  out  in  my 
memory.  The  people  had  not  expected  such  a  summing-up  of  the 
di.scussion;  each  sentence  contained  an  argument;  the  audience  was 
surprised,  pleased  and  enthusiastic.  The  occasion  was  a  Chicago  con- 
vention in  miniature,  and  was  satisfactory  to  those  most  concerned. 
In  addition  to  these  eleven  joint  contests,  Mr.  Bryan  made  a  thorough 
canvass,  speaking  about  eighty  times  and  visiting  every  city  and  vil- 
lage in  the  district.  Though  these  debates  were  crisp  and  sharp  in 
argument,  they  were  marked  by  the  utmost  friendliness  between  the 
opponents.  At  the  close  of  the  last  debate,  Mr.  Bryan  presented  to  Mr. 
Connell  a  copy  of  Gray's  Elegy,  "with  the  following  remarks : 

Presentation  of  Gray*s  Elegy  at  Qose  of  Debate. 

Mr.  Connell:  We  now  bring  to  a  close  this  series  of  debates  which  was 
arranged  by  our  committees.  I  am  glad  that  we  have  been  able  to  conduct 
these  discussions  in  a  courteous  and  friendly  manner.  If  I  have,  in  any  way, 
offended  you  in  word  or  deed  I  offer  apology  and  regret,  and  as  freely  forgive. 
I  desire  to  present  to  you  in  remembrance  of  these  pleasant  meetings  this  little 
volume,  because  it  contains  "Gray's  Elegy,"  in  perusing  which  I  trust  you  will 
find  as  much  pleasure  and  profit  as  I  have  found.  It  is  one  of  the  most  beau- 
tiful and  touching  tributes  to  humble  life  that  literature  contains.  Grand  in  its 
sentiment  and  sublime  in  its  simplicity,  we  may  both  find  in  it  a  solace  in  vic- 
tory or  defeat.     If  success  should  crown  your  efforts  in  this  campaign,  and  it 


WILLIAM  JENNINGS  BRYAN,  JR. 


BIOGRAPHY.  53 

should  be  your  lot  "The  applause  of  listening  senates  to  command,"  and  I  am 
left 

A  youth  to  fortune  and  to  fame  unknown, 

Forget   not  us   who   in   the  common  walks   of  life  perform   our  part,   but  in 
the  hour  of  your  triumph  recall  the  verse: 

Let  not  ambition  mock  ttieir  useful  toil, 

Their  homely  joys  and  destiny  obscure; 
Nor  grandeur  hear,   with  disdainful   smile. 

The  short  and  simple  annals  of  the  poor. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  by  the  verdict  of  my  countrymen,  I  shall  be  made 
your  successor,  let  it  not  be  said  of  you: 

And  melancholy  marked  him  for  her  own. 
But  find  sweet  consolation  in  the  thought:  ^ 

Full  many  a  gem  of  purest  ray  serene. 

The  dark  unfathomed   caves  of  ocean  bear; 
Full  many  a  flower  was  born   to  blush  unseen. 

And  waste  its  sweetness  on  the  desert  air. 

But  whether  the  palm  of  victory  is  given  to  you  or  to  me,  let  us  remember 
those  of  whom  the  poet  says: 

Far  from  the  madding  crowd's  ignoble  strife 
Their  sober  wishes  never  learned  to  stray. 
Along  the  cool  sequestered  vales  of  life 
They  keep  the  noiseless  tenor  of  their  way. 

These  are  the  ones  most  likely  to  be  forgotten  by  the  Government.  When 
the  poor  and  weak  cry  out  for  relief  they,  too,  often  hear  no  answer  but  "the 
echo  of  their  cry,"  while  the  rich,  the  strong,  the  powerful  are  given  an  atten- 
tive ear.  For  this  reason  is  class  legislation  dangeious  and  deadly.  It  takes 
from  those  least  able  to  lose  and  gives  to  those  who  are  least  in  need.  The 
safety  of  our  farmers  and  our  laborers  is  not  in  special  legislation,  but  in  equal 
and  just  laws  that  bear  alike  on  every  man.  The  great  masses  of  our  people 
are  interested,  not  in  getting  their  hands  into  other  people's  pockets,  but  in 
keeping  the  hands  of  other  people  out  of  their  pockets.  Let  me,  in  parting, 
express  the  hope  that  you  and  I  may  be  instrumental  in  bringing  our  Govern- 
ment back  to  better  laws  which  will  give  equal  treatment  without  regard  to 
creed  or  condition.     I  bid  you  a  friendly  farewell. 

When  the  returns  were  all  in,  it  was  found  that  Mr.  Bryan  was 
elected  by  a  plurality  of  6,713.  Desiring  to  give  his  entire  time  to  his 
Congressional  work,  he,  soon  after  election,  so  arranged  his  affairs 
as  to  retire  from  practice,  although  retaining  a  nominal  connection 
with  the  firm. 

In  the  speakership  caucus  with  which  Congress  opened,  Mr.  Bryan 
supported  Mr.  Springer,  in  whose  district  we  had  lived  when  at  Jack- 
sonville; in  the  House, he  voted  for  Mr.  Crisp, the  caucus  nominee.  Mr. 
Springer  was  made  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means, 
and  it  was  largely  through  his  influence  that  IMr.  Bryan  was  given  a 
place  upon  that  committee.     His  first  speech  of  consequence  was  the 


54  BIOGRAPHY. 

tariff  speech  of  March  i6,  1892.  This  was  the  second  important  event  in 
his  career  as  a  pubHc  speaker.  The  place  which  he  held  upon  the 
Ways  and  Means  Committee  is  rarely  given  to  a  new  member,  and  he 
wished  the  speech  to  justify  the  appointment.  It  is  perhaps  unneces- 
sary for  me  to  comment  at  length  upon  the  reception  accorded  this 
speech,  as  the  press  at  the  time  gave  such  reports  that  the  occasion 
will  probably  be  remembered  by'  those  who  read  this  sketch.  This 
speech  increased  his  acquaintance  with  public  men,  and  added  to 
his  strength  at  home.  More  than  one  hundred  thousand  copies  were 
circulated  by  members  of  Congress.  Upon  his  return  to  Nebraska,  he 
was  able  to  secure  re-election  in  a  new  district  (the  State  having  been 
reapportioned  in  1891)  which  that  year  gave  the  Republican  state 
ticket  a  plurality  of  6,500.  His  opponent  this  time  was  Judge  A,  W. 
Field  of  our  own  city.  The  Democratic  committee  invited  the  Repub- 
licans to  join  in  arranging  a  series  of  debates,  and  this  invitation  was 
accepted.  This  was  even  a  more  bitter  contest  than  the  campaign  of 
1890,  Mr.  McKinley,  Mr.  Foraker  and  others  being  called  to  Nebraska 
to  aid  the  Repubhcan  candidate.  Besides  the  eleven  debates,  which 
aroused  much  enthusiasm,  Mr.  Bryan  again  made  a  thorough  canvass 
of  the  district.  The  victory  was  claimed  by  both  sides  until  the  Fri- 
day following  the  election,  when  the  result  was  determined  by  of- 
ficial count,  Mr.  Bryan  receiving  a  plurality  of  140. 

In  the  Fifty-Third  Congress,  Mr.  Bryan  was  reappointed  upon  the 
Ways  and  Means  Committee  and  assisted  in  the  preparation  of  the 
Wilson  bill.  He  was  a  member  of  the  sub-committee  (consisting  of 
Representatives  MacMillan,  Montgomery  and  himself)  which  drafted 
the  income  tax  portion  of  the  bill.  In  the  spring  of  1893,  through  the 
courtesy  of  the  State  Department,  Mr.  Bryan  obtained  a  report  from  the 
several  European  nations  which  collect  an  income  tax,  and  the  results 
of  this  research  were  embodied  in  the  Congressional  Records  during  the 
debate.  He  succeeded  in  having  incorporated  in  the  bill  a  provision 
borrowed  from  the  Prussian  law  whereby  the  citizens  who  have  taxable 
incomes  make  their  own  returns  and  those  whose  incomes  are  within 
the  exemption  are  relieved  from  annoyance.  On  behalf  of  the  com- 
mittee, Mr.  Bryan  closed  the  debate  upon  the  income  tax,  replying 
to  Mr.  Cockran. 

During  the  discussion  of  the  Wilson  bill,  Mr.  Bryan  spoke  in  its 
defense.  His  principal  work  of  the  term,  however,  was  in  connection 
with  monetary  legislation.  His  speech  of  August  16,  1893,  in  op- 
position to  the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  brought  out 
even  more  hearty  commendation  than  his  first  tariff  speech.    Of  this 


BIOGRAPHY.  55 

effort,  it  may  be  said  that  it  contained  the  results  of  three  years  of 
careful  study  upon  the  money  question. 

While  in  Congress  he  made  a  fruitless  effort  to  secure  the  passage 
of  the  following  bill : 

Be  it  enacted,  etc. :  That  section  800  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  the  United 
States,  of  1878,  be  amended  by  adding  thereto  the  words  "In  civil  cases  the 
verdict  of  three-fourths  of  the  jurors  constituting  the  jury  shall  stand  as  the 
verdict  of  the  jury,  and  such  a  verdict  shall  have  the  same  force  and  effect 
as  a  unanimous   verdict." 

The  desire  to  have  the  law  changed  so  as  to  permit  less  than  a 
unanimous  verdict  in  civil  cases,  was  one  which  he  had  long  enter- 
tained. In  February,  1890,  in  response  to  a  toast  at  a  bar  association 
banquet  in  Lincoln,  he  spoke  upon  the  jury  system,  advocating  the 
same  reform.    His  remarks  were  as  follows : 

The  Jury  System. 

One  of  the  questions  v^rhich  has  been  for  some  time  discussed,  and  which 
is  now  the  subject  of  controversy,  is,  "Has  the  jury  system  outlived  its  use- 
fulness?" 

I  think  I  voice  the  opinion  of  most  of  those  present  when  to  the  question 
I  answer  an  emphatic  No. 

To  defend  this  answer  it  will  not  be  necessary  to  recall  the  venerable  age 
of  the  system,  its  past  achievements,  or  the  splendid  words  of  praise  which  have 
been  uttered  in  its  behalf.  It  finds  ample  excuse  for  its  existence  in  the  needs 
of  this  time. 

The  circumstances  which  called  it  into  life  have  passed  away  and  many  of  its 
characteristics  have  been  entirely  changed,  but  never,  I  am  persuaded,  in  the 
history  of  the  English  speaking  people,  has  the  principle  which  underlies  the  trial 
by  jury  been  more  imperatively  demanded  than  it  is  today. 

This  is  an  age  of  rapid  accumulation  of  wealth,  and  the  multiplication  of 
corporations  gives  to  money  an  extraordinary  power. 

One  million  dollars  in  the  hands  of  one  man  or  one  company  will  out- 
weigh, in  the  political  and  social  world,  ten  times  that  sum  divided  among  a 
thousand  people.  Can  the  temple  of  justice  hope  to  escape  its  polluting  touch 
without  some  such  barrier  like  that  which  the  jury  system  raises  for  its  protec- 
tion? Is  there  not  something  significant  in  the  direction  from  which  much  of 
the  complaint  of  the  system  comes  from? 

If  the  question,  "Shall  the  jury  be  abandoned  or  retained?"  were  submitted 
to  a  vote,  we  would  find  prominent  among  the  opposing  forces  the  corporate 
influences,  the  wealthy  classes,  and  those  busy  citizens  to  whom  jury  service, 
or  even  the  duty  of  an  elector,  is  a  burden. 

While  the  great  mass  of  its  supporters  would  be  found  among  those  who 
are  compelled  to  fight  the  battle  of  life  unaided  by  those  powerful  allies — social 
position,  political  influence  and  money — men  whose  only  sword  is  the  ballot, 
and  whose  only  shield,  the  jury.  The  jury  system  is  not  perfect — we  do  not 
look  for  perfection  in  government — but  it  has  this  great  advantage,  that  if  the 


56  BIOGRAPHY. 

verdict  falls  to  one  side  of  the  straight  line  of  the  law  it  is  usually  upon  the  side 
of  the  poorest  adversary. 

All  stand  equal  before  the  law,  whether  they  be  rich  or  poor,  high  or  low, 
weak  or  strong;  but  no  system  has  yet  been  devised  which  will  insure  exact 
justice  at  all  times  between  man  and  man. 

We  choose  not  between  a  perfect  system  and  an  imperfect  one,  but  between 
an  imperfect  system  and  one  more  imperfect  still.  And  if  the  scales  of  justice 
cannot  be  perfectly  poised,  the  safety  of  society  demands  that  they  tip  most 
easily  toward  the  side  of  the  weak. 

Faith  in  trial  by  jury  implies  no  reflection  upon  the  integrity  of  the  bench. 
We  recall  with  pardonable  pride  the  names  of  our  illustrious  judges  whose 
genius  and  learning  have  given  luster  to  our  profession  and  whose  purity  and 
probity  have  crowned  it  with  glory. 

But  they  won  their  distinction  in  expounding  the  law  and  left  the  decision 
of  the  facts  to  those  fresh  from  contact  with  the  busy  world. 

If  to  the  present  duties  of  the  judge  we  add  those  now  discharged  by  the 
jury,  is  it  not  possible  that  the  selection  of  a  judge  will  be  secured  because 
of  his  known  sympathies?  Will  not  the  standard  be  so  lowered  that  we  may 
see  upon  the  bench  an  agent  instead  of  an  arbiter? 

In  what  position  will  the  suitor  be  who  finds,  when  called  before  a  biased 
tribunal,  that  he  has  neither  peremptory  challenge  nor  challenge  for  cause. 
No  more  fatal  blow  could  be  struck  at  our  national  welfare  than  to  give  oc- 
casion for  the  belief  that  in  our  courts  a  man's  redress  depends  upon  his  ability 
to  pay  for  it. 

If  the  jury  can  guard  the  court  room  from  the  invasion  of  unfair  influences 
it  will  be  as  valuable  for  what  it  prevents  as  for  what  it  gives. 

Time  does  not  admit  of  extended  reference  to  those  faults  in  the  system 
which  give  occasion  for  just  criticism,  faults  which  its  friends  are  in  duty  bound 
to  prune  away  from  it.  The  requirement  of  an  unanimous  verdict  causes  many 
mistrials.  In  civil  causes,  where  a  decision  follows  the  evidence,  it  is  difificult  to 
see  why  substantial  justice  would  not  be  done  by  a  majority,  or,  at  most,  a  two- 
thirds  majority  verdict;  but  we  cannot  abandon  the  old  rule  in  criminal  cases 
without  trespassing  on  the  sacred  right  of  the  accused  to  the  benefit  of  every 
reasonable  doubt;  for  a  divided  jury,  in  itself,  raises  a  doubt  as  to  his  guilt.  The 
law  recently  passed  making  it  a  misdemeanor  for  a  man  to  ask  for  appointment 
as  a  juror,  or  for  an  attorney  to  seek  a  place  for  a  friend,  is  a  step  in  the  right 
direction. 

Between  a  partisan  juror  and  a  professional  juror  it  is  only  a  choice  be- 
tween evils.  If  to  fill  the  panel  with  bystanders  means  to  fill  it  with  men  stand- 
ing by  for  the  purpose  of  being  called,  we  are  ready  for  a  law  which  will  compel 
the  sheriff  to  seek  talesmen  beyond  the  limits  of  the  court  house.  Any  change, 
the  aim  of  which  is  to  compel  the  selection  of  men  of  ordinary  intelligence  and 
approved  integrity  as  jurors,  will  be  acceptable  to  the  people.  But  now  that 
all  men  read  the  news,  the  information  thus  acquired  should  no  longer  render 
them  incompetent  for  jury  service.  It  is  a  premium  upon  ignorance  which  we 
cannot  afford  to  pay.  Instead  of  summoning  a  juryman  for  a  whole  term  we 
should  limit  his  service  to  one  or  two  weeks.  This  would  lighten  the  burden 
without  impairing  the  principle.     To  that  argument,  however,  which  assumes 


BIOGRAPHY.  57 

that  business  men  can  afford  no  time  for  jury  service  there  can  be  but  one  answer, 
No  government  can  long  endure  unless  its  citizens  are  willing  to  make  some 
sacrifice  for  its  existence. 

In  this,  our  land,  we  are  called  upon  to  give  but  little  in  return  for  the  ad- 
vantages which  we  receive.  Shall  we  give  that  little  grudgingly?  Our  defini- 
tion of  patriotism  is  often  too  narrow. 

Shall  the  lover  of  his  country  measure  his  loyalty  only  by  his  service  as 
a  soldier?  No!  Patriotism  calls  for  the  faithful  and  conscientious  performance 
of  all  of  the  duties  of  citizenship,  in  small  matters  as  well  as  great,  at  home  as 
well  as  upon  the  tented  field. 

There  is  no  more  menacing  feature  in  these  modern  times  than  the  disin- 
clination of  what  are  called  the  better  classes  to  assume  the  burdens  of  citizen- 
ship. If  we  desire  to  preserve  to  future  generations  the  purity  of  our  courts 
and  the  freedom  of  our  people,  we  must  lose  no  opportunity  to  impress  upon 
our  citizens  the  fact  that  above  all  pleasure,  above  all  convenience,  above  all 
business,  they  must  place  their  duty  to  their  government;  for  a  good  government 
doubles  every  joy  and  a  bad  government  multiplies  every  sorrow.  Times  change 
but  principles  endure.    The  jury  has  protected  us  from  the  abuse  of  power. 

While  human  government  exists  the  tendency  to  abuse  power  will  remain. 
This  system,  coming  down  from  former  generations  crowned  with  the  honors 
of  age,  is  today  and  for  the  future  our  hope. 

Let  us  correct  its  defects  with  kindly  hands,  let  us  purge  it  of  its  imperfec- 
tions and  it  will  be,  as  in  the  past,  the  bulwark  of  our  liberties. 

Besides  the  work  which  I  have  mentioned,  Mr.  Bryan  spoke  briefly 
upon  several  other  questions,  namely,  in  favor  of  the  election  of  United 
States  Senators  by  a  direct  vote  of  the  people,  and  in  favor  of  the  anti- 
option  bill;  in  opposition  to  the  railroad  pooling  bill  and  against  the 
extension  of  the  Pacific  liens. 

In  the  Fifty-Third  Congress,  the  Democrats  adopted  a  rule  which 
was  somewhat  similar  to  the  one  in  force  under  Speaker  Reed,  pro- 
viding for  the  counting  of  a  quorum.  Mr.  Bryan  opposed  this  rule 
and  I  quote  the  reasons  which  he  then  gave  in  support  of  his  position. 

Counting  a  Quorum. 

Mr.  Speaker:  I  am  obliged  to  the  gentleman  from  Maine  for  this  courtesy. 
The  question  upon  which  we  are  called  to  act  is  one  of  a  great  deal  more 
importance  than  some  members  seem  to  think,  and  the  objection  which  is 
made  to  the  rule  by  some  of  us,  who  have  not  been  able  to  favor  it,  is  based 
upon  reasons  far  more  weighty  than  gentlemen  have  assumed. 

The  constitution  of  the  State  of  Nebraska,  which  I  have  the  honor  in 
part  to  represent,  contains  this  provision: 

No  bill  shall  be  passed  unless  by  assent  of  a  majority  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  each  House  of  the  Legislature,  and  the  question  upon  the  final 
passage  shall  be  taken  immediately  upon  its  last  reading,  and  the  yeas  and 
nays  shall  be  entered  upon  the  journal. 


58  BIOGRAPHY. 

The  constitutions  of  a  majority  of  the  States  of  the  Union,  among  them 
the  States  of  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Illinois,  Indiana,  Ohio,  and  I  might 
name  them  all  if  time  permitted,  provide  the  same,  the  object  being  to  prevent 
less  than  one  half  of  all  the  members  elected  to  the  Legislature  from  passing  laws. 
It  is  only  by  the  concurrence  of  a  majority  of  the  members  that  we  can  know 
that  the  majority  of  the  people  desire  the  law.  The  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  does  not  contain  a  similar  provision;  and  there  is  no  question,  since 
the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court,  that  it  is  within  the  power  of  this  House 
to  declare  by  rule  in  what  manner  a  quorum  may  be  ascertained.  It  can  be 
done  in  the  manner  provided  in  this  rule,  or  it  can  be  done  by  the  call  of  the 
yeas  and  nays,  as  it  has  been  done  for  a  hundred  years.  Now,  the  question 
with  me  is  this:  Which  is  the  safer  plan?  According  to  the  rule  which  has 
been  in  vogue  a  hundred  years,  the  minority  has  the  safeguard  which  is  ex- 
pressly secured  in  the  constitutions  of  a  majority  of  the  States;  according  to  the 
old  rule  the  minority,  by  refusing  to  vote,  can  compel  the  concurrence  of  a 
majority  before  a  law  is  passed. 

Now,  I  believe  that  is  a  wise  provision.  I  do  not  see  why  it  is  wiser  in  a 
State  than  in  Congress;  I  do  not  know  why  it  is  necessary  that  the  members 
of  the  Legislature  in  my  State,  or  in  New  York,  should  be  compelled  to  vote 
yea  or  nay  when  a  bill  shall  pass,  and  that  a  majority  shall  concur,  unless  the 
same  reasons  apply  in  this  body. 

In  the  spring  of  1804,  Mr.  Bryan  announced  that  he  would  not  be 
a  candidate  for  re-election  to  Congress,  and  later  decided  to  stand  as 
a  candidate  for  the  United  States  Senate.  He  was  nominated  for  that 
office  by  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  Democratic  State  Convention. 
While  the  Republicans  made  no  nomination,  it  seemed  certain  that  Mr. 
Thurston  would  be  their  candidate  and  the  Democratic  committee  ac- 
cordingly issued  a  challenge  to  him  for  a  series  of  debates.  The  Re- 
publicans were  also  invited  to  arrange  a  debate  between  Mr.  McKinley 
and  Mr.  Bryan,  Mr.  McKinley  having  at  that  time  an  appointment  to 
speak  in  Nebraska.  The  latter  invitation  was  declined,  but  two  meet- 
ings were  arranged  with  Mr.  Thurston.  These  were  the  largest 
political  gatherings  ever  held  in  the  State  and  were  as  gratifying  to  the 
friends  of  Mr.  Bryan  as  his  previous  debates.  During  the  campaign, 
Mr.  Bryan  made  a  canvass  of  the  State,  speaking  four  or  five  hours 
each  day,  and  sometimes  riding  thirty  miles  over  rough  roads  between 
speeches.  At  the  election,  Nebraska  shared  in  the  general  landslide; 
the  Republicans  had  a  large  majority  in  the  Legislature  and  elected 
Mr.  Thurston. 

This  defeat  was  a  disappointment,  but  it  did  not  discourage  Mr. 
Bryan,  as  is  evident  from  an  address  to  his  supporters,  extracts  from 
which  follow: 


BIOGRAPHY.  59 

Letter  to  Friends  after  Senatorial  Defeat. 

The  Legislature  is  Republican,  and  a  Republican  Senator  will  now  be 
elected  to  represent  Nebraska.  This  may  be  mortifying  to  the  numerous 
chairmen  who  have  introduced  me  to  audiences  as  "the  next  Senator  from  Ne- 
braska," but  it  illustrates  the  uncertainty  of  prophecies. 

I  appreciate  more  than  words  can  express  the  cordial  good  will  and  the 
loyal  support  of  the  friends  to  whom  I  am  indebted  for  the  political  honors 
which  I  have  received.  I  am  especially  grateful  to  those  who  bear  without 
humiliation  the  name  of  the  common  people,  for  they  have  been  my  friends 
when  others  have  deserted  me.  I  appreciate  also  the  kind  words  of  many  who 
have  been  restrained  by  party  ties  from  giving  me  their  votes.  I  have  been  a 
hired  man  for  four  years,  and,  now  that  the  campaign  is  closed,  I  may  be  par- 
doned for  saying  that  as  a  public  servant  I  have  performed  my  duty  to  the 
best  of  my  ability,  and  am  not  ashamed  of  the  record  made. 

I  stepped  from  private  life  into  national  politics  at  the  bidding  of  my 
countrymen;  at  their  bidding  I  again  take  my  place  in  the  ranks  and  resume 
without  sorrow  the  work  from  which  they  called  me.  It  is  the  glory  of  our 
institutions  that  public  officials  exercise  authority  by  the  consent  of  the  gov- 
erned rather  than  by  divine  or  hereditary  right.  Paraphrasing  the  language  of 
Job,  each  public  servant  can  say  of  departing  honors:  "The  people  gave  and 
the  people  have  taken  away,  blessed  be  the  name  of  the  people." 

Speaking  of  my  own  experience  in  politics,  I  may  again  borrow  an  idea 
from  the  great  sufferer  and  say:  "What,  shall  we  receive  good  at  the  hands 
of  the  people,  and  shall  we  not  receive  evil?"  I  have  received  good  even  be- 
yond my  deserts,  and  I  accept  defeat  without  complaint.  I  ask  my  friends  not 
to  cherish  resentment  against  any  one  who  may  have  contributed  to  the  result. 

41  :)(  ^  ;|c  ^  :|c  :)( 

The  friends  of  these  reforms  have  fought  a  good  fight;  they  have  kept  the 
faith,  and  they  will  not  have  finished  their  course  until  the  reforms  are  accom- 
plished. Let  us  be  grateful  for  the  progress  made,  and  "with  malice  toward 
none  and  charity  for  all"  begin  the  work  of  the  next  campaign. 

Mr.  Bryan  received  the  votes  of  all  the  Democrats  and  of  nearly 
half  of  the  Populist  members.  It  might  be  suggested  here  that  while 
Mr.  Bryan  had  never  received  a  nomination  from  the  Populist  party,  he 
had  been,  since  1892,  materially  aided  by  individual  members  of  that 
organization.  In  Nebraska,  the  Democratic  party  has  been  in  the 
minority,  and  as  there  are  several  points  of  agreement  between  it  and 
the  Populist  party,  Mr.  Bryan  advocated  co-operation  between  the  two. 
In  the  spring  of  1893,  he  received  the  support  of  a  majority  of  the 
Democratic  members  of  the  Legislature,  but,  when  it  became  evident 
that  no  Democrat  could  be  elected,  he  assisted  in  the  election  of  Sen- 
ator Allen,  a  Populist.  Again,  in  1894,  in  the  Democratic  State  Conven- 
tion, he  aided  in  securing  the  nomination  of  a  portion  of  the  Populist 
ticket,  including  Mr.  Holcomb,  Populist  candidate  for  Governor.  The 
cordial  relations  which  existed  between  the  Democrats  and  Populists 


60  BIOGRAPHY. 

in  Nebraska  were  a  potent  influence  in  securing  his  nomination  at 
Chicago. 

On  September  ist,  1894,  Mr.  Bryan  became  chief  of  the  editorial 
staff  of  the  Omaha  World-Herald,  and  from  that  date  until  the  last  na- 
tional convention  gave  a  portion  of  his  time  to  this  work.  This  posi- 
tion enabled  him  daily  to  reach  a  large  number  of  people  in  the  discus- 
sion of  public  questions  and  also  added  considerably  to  his  income. 
While  the  contract  fixed  a  certain  amount  of  editorial  matter  as  a 
minimum,  his  interest  in  the  work  was  such  that  he  generally  exceeded 
rather  than  fell  below  the  required  space. 

After  the  adjournment  of  Congress,  Mr.  Bryan,  on  his  way  home, 
lectured  at  Cincinnati,  Nashville,  Tenn.,  Little  Rock,  Ark.,  and  at 
several  points  in  Missouri,  arriving  in  Lincoln  March  19,  his  thirty- 
fifth  birthday.  The  Jefferson  Club  tendered  him  a  reception  and  an 
opera  house  packed  with  an  appreciative  audience  rendered  this  a  very 
gratifying  occasion  to  Mr.  Bryan.  As  he  was  no  longer  in  public  life, 
and  could  show  no  favors  in  return,  the  disinterested  friendship  shown 
will  always  be  remembered  with  pleasure.  He  chose  as  his  theme, 
"Thomas  Jefferson  still  lives,"  and,  after  reviewing  the  work  of  the 
Fifty-third  Congress,  discussed  at  length  the  principles  of  his  patron 
saint.  His  admiration  for  the  Sage  of  Monticello  is  so  well  known 
that  I  quote  a  tribute  which  he  once  paid  him: 

Let  us  then,  with  the  courage  of  Andrew  Jackson,  apply  to  present  condi- 
tions the  principles  taught  by  Thomas  Jeflferson — Thomas  Jefferson,  the  great- 
est constructive  statesman  whom  the  world  has  ever  known;  the  grandest  war- 
rior who  ever  battled  for  human  liberty!  He  quarried  from  the  mountain  of 
eternal  truth  the  four  pillars,  upon  whose  strength  all  popular  government 
must  rest.  In  the  Declaration  of  American  Independence  he  proclaimed  the 
principles  with  which  there  is,  without  which  there  cannot  be  "a  government 
of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for  the  people."  When  he  declared  that  "all 
men  are  created  equal;  that  they  are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain 
inalienable  rights;  that  among  these  are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happi- 
ness. That  to  secure  these  rights  governments  are  instituted  among  men, 
deriving  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed."  he  declared  all 
that  lies  between  the  Alpha  and  Omega  of  Democracy. 

Alexander  "wept  for  other  worlds  to  conquer"  after  he  had  carried  his 
victorious  banner  throughout  the  then  known  world;  Napoleon  "rearranged 
the  map  of  Europe  with  his  sword"  amid  the  lamentations  of  those  by  whose  blood 
he  was  exalted;  but  when  these  and  other  military  heroes  are  forgotten  and 
their  achievements  disappear  in  the  cycle's  sweep  of  years,  children  will  still 
lisp  the  name  of  Jefferson,  and  freemen  will  ascribe  due  praise  to  him  who  filled 
the  kneeling  subject's  heart  with  hope  and  bade  him  stand  erect — a  sovereign 
among  his  peers. 


GRACE  DEXTER  BRYAN. 


BIOGRAPHY.  63 

Mr.  Bryan  intended  to  resume  the  practice  of  law  and  re-open  his 
office.  At  this  time,  however,  the  contest  for  supremacy  in  the  Demo- 
cratic party  had  begun  in  earnest  and  calls  for  speeches  were  so  nu- 
merous and  so  urgent  that  it  seemed  best  to  devote  his  time  to  lecturing 
and  to  the  public  discussion  of  the  money  question.  In  view  of  the 
suggestions  which  have  been  made  that  Mr.  Bryan  was  in  the  pay  of 
the  silver  league,  I  will  be  pardoned  for  speaking  of  the  earnings  during 
these  months.  His  editorial  salary  formed  the  basis  of  his  income. 
When  lecturing  before  Chautauquas  and  similar  societies  he  was  paid 
as  other  lecturers.  At  meetings  where  no  admission  was  charged  he 
sometimes  received  compensation  and  at  other  times  received  nothing. 
Many  of  the  free  speeches  were  made  en  route  to  lecture  engagements, 
and  his  compensation  ranged  from  traveling  expenses  to  one  hun- 
dred dollars.  Only  upon  two  or  three  occasions  did  he  receive  more 
than  this.  Never  at  any  time  was  he  under  the  direction  of,  or  in  the 
pay  of,  any  silver  league  or  association  of  persons  pecuniarily  interested 
in  silver.  During  the  interim  between  the  adjournment  of  Congress 
and  the  Chicago  convention  he  spoke  in  all  the  States  of  the  West  and 
South,  and  became  acquainted  with  those  most  prominently  connected 
with  the  silver  cause. 

I  have  briefly  outlined  the  life  and  political  career  of  Mr.  Bryan. 
Perhaps  it  may  please  the  reader  to  add  a  few  words  concerning  his 
home  life. 

Our  children  are  three.  Ruth  Baird  is  now  eleven;  William  Jen- 
nings, Jr.,  is  seven  and  a  half,  and  Grace  Dexter  will  soon  be  six.  The 
older  girl  is  said  to  be  very  much  like  her  mother;  the  younger  strongly 
resembles  her  father;  and  the  son  seems  a  composite  photograph  of 
both  parents.  Though  for  several  years  past,  Mr.  Bryan's  work  has 
often  called  him  from  home,  he  arranges  to  return  for  the  Sabbath 
whenever  possible. 

During  his  service  in  Congress,  the  family  spent  three  of  the  five 
sessions  with  him  in  Washington.  We  found  a  very  comfortable 
and  pleasant  home  at  131  B  street,  S.  E.,  with  Mr.  C.  T.  Bride, 
and  here,  the  four  years  were  spent.  No  member  can  live  within 
his  salary  and  make  much  of  social  life.  We  did  little  visiting,  but  were 
often  found  at  lectures  and  heard  many  actors  of  note.  The  National  Li- 
brary was  an  endless  source  of  pleasure  and  many  rare  books  were  read 
during  those  years.  Though  an  advocate  of  an  eight  hour  day,  Mr. 
Bryan  has,  during  the  last  thirteen  years,  averaged  nearly  twelve  hours 
a  day  at  professional  and  literary  work. 


64  BIOGRAPHY. 

He  spoke  on  several  occasions  outside  of  Congress.  The  two  most 
important  speeches  deUvered  were,  the  one  at  Tammany  Hall,  July  4, 
1892,  the  other,  at  the  National  Cemetery  at  Arlington,  May  30,  1894. 
1  insert  the  latter.  The  scene  was  impressive  and  the  audience  repre- 
sentative. President  Cleveland  and  four  of  his  cabinet  were  in  attend- 
ance. 

Memorial  Day  Address. 

Arlington  Cemetery,  Washington,  D.  C,  May  30,  1894. 

With  flowers  in  our  hands  and  sadness  in  our  hearts  we  stand  amid  the 
tombs  where  the  nation's  dead  are  sleeping.  It  is  appropriate  that  the  Chief 
Executive  is  here,  accompanied  by  his  Cabinet;  it  is  appropriate  that  the 
soldier's  widow  is  here,  and  the  soldier's  son;  it  is  appropriate  that  here  are 
assembled,  in  numbers  growing  less  each  year,  the  scarred  survivors,  Federal  and 
Confederate,  of  our  last  great  war;  it  is  appropriate,  also,  that  these  exercises 
in  honor  of  comrades  dead  should  be  conducted  by  comrades  still  surviving. 
All  too  soon  the  day  will  come  when  these  graves  must  be  decorated  by  hands 
unused  to  implements  of  war,  and  when  these  speeches  must  be  made  by  lips 
that  never  answered  to  a  roll  call. 

We,  who  are  of  the  aftermath,  cannot  look  upon  the  flag  with  the  same 
emotions  that  thrill  you  who  have  followed  it  as  your  pillar  of  cloud  by  day 
and  your  pillar  of  fire  by  night,  nor  can  we  appreciate  it  as  you  can  who  have 
seen  it  waving  in  front  of  reinforcements  when  succor  meant  escape  from 
death;  neither  can  we,  standing  by  these  blossom-covered  mounds,  feel  as  you 
have  often  felt  when  far  away  from  home  and  on  host'le  soil  you  have  laid 
your  companions  to  rest;  but  from  a  new  generation  we  can  bring  you  the 
welcome  assurance  that  the  commemoration  of  this  day  will  not  depart  with 
you.  We  may  neglect  the  places  where  the  nation's  greatest  victories  have  been 
won,  but  we  cannot  forget  the  Arlingtons  which  the  nation  has  consecrated 
with  its  tears. 

To  ourselves  as  well  as  to  the  dead  we  owe  the  duty  which  we  discharge 
here,  for  monuments  and  memorial  days  declare  the  patriotism  of  the  living 
no  less  than  the  virtues  of  those  whom  they  commemorate. 

We  would  be  blind  indeed  to  our  own  interests  and  to  the  welfare  of 
posterity  if  we  were  deaf  to  the  just  demands  of  the  soldier  and  his  dependents. 
We  are  grateful  for  the  services  rendered  by  our  defenders,  whether  illustrious 
or  nameless,  and  yet  a  nation's  gratitude  is  not  entirely  unselfish,  since  by  our 
regard  for  the  dead  we  add  to  the  security  of  the  living;  by  our  remembrance 
of  those  who/[have  suffered  we  give  inspiration  to  those  upon  whose  valor  we 
must  hereafter  rely,  and  prove  ourselves  worthy  of  the  sacrifices  which  have 
been  made  and  which  may  be  again  required. 

The  essence  of  patriotism  lies  in  a  willingness  to  sacrifice  for  one's  coun- 
try, just  as  true  greatness  finds  expression,  not  in  blessings  enjoyed,  but  in  good 
bestowed.  Read  the  words  inscribed  on  the  monuments  reared  by  loving 
hands  to  the  heroes  of  the  past;  they  do  not  speak  of  wealth  inherited,  or 
honors  bought  or  of  hours  in  leisure  spent,  but  of  service  done.  Twenty 
years,  forty  years,  a  life  or  life's  most  precious  blood  he  yielded  up  for  the 


BIOGRAPHY.  65 

welfare  of  his  fellows — this  is  the  simple  story  which  proves  that  it  is  now, 
and  ever  has  been,  more  blessed  to  give  than  to  receive. 

jThe  officer  was  a  patriot  when  he  gave  his  ability  to  his  country  and 
riskecTiiis  name  and  fame  upon  the  fortunes  of  war;  the  private  soldier  was  a 
patriot  when  he  took  his  place  in  the  ranks  and  offered  his  body  as  a  bulwark 
to  protect  the  flag;  the  wife  was  a  patriot  when  she  bade  her  husband  farewell 
and  gathered  about  her  the  little  brood  over  which  she  must  exercise  both  a 
mother's  and  a  father's  care;  and,  if  there  can  be  degrees  in  patriotism,  the 
mother  stood  first  among  the  patriots  when  she  gave  to  the  nation  her  sons, 
the  divinely  appointed  support  of  her  declining  years,  and  as  she  brushed  the 
tears  away  thanked  God  that  he  had  given  her  the  strength  to  rear  strong  and 
courageous  sons  for  the  battlefield. 

To  us  who  were  born  too  late  to  prove  upon  the  battlefield  our  courage 
and  our  loyalty  it  is  gratifying  to  know  that  opportunity  will  not  be  wanting 
to  show  our  love  of  country.  In  a  nation  like  ours,  where  the  Government  is 
founded  upon  the  principle  of  equality  and  derives  its  just  powers  from  the 
consent  of  the  governed;  in  a  land  like  ours,  I  say,  where  every  citizen  is  a 
sovereign  and  where  no  one  cares  to  wear  a  crown,  every  year  presents  a  battle- 
field and  every  day  brings  forth  occasion  for  the  display  of  patriotism. 

And  on  this  memorial  day  we  shall  fall  short  of  our  duty  if  we 
content  ourselves  with  praising  the  dead  or  complimenting  the  living  and  fail 
to  make  preparations  for  those  responsibilities  which  present  times  and  present 
conditions  impose  upon  us.  We  can  find  instruction  in  that  incomparable 
address  delivered  by  Abraham  Lincoln  on  the  battlefield  of  Gettysburg.  It 
should  be  read  as  a  part  of  the  exercises  of  this  day  on  each  returning  year  as 
the  Declaration  of  Independence  is  read  on  the  Fourth  of  July.  Let  me  quote 
from  it(_for  its  truths,  like  all  truths,  are  applicable  in  all  times  and  climes: 

'  We  have  come  to  dedicate  a  portion  of  that  field  as  a  final  resting  place  for  those 
■who  here  gave  their  lives  that  that  nation  might  live.  It  is  altogether  fitting  and  proper 
that  we  should  do  this.  But  in  a  larger  sense  we  cannot  dedicate,  we  cannot  consecrate, 
we  cannot  hallow  this  ground.  The  brave  men,  living  and  dead,  who  struggled  here  have 
consecrated  it  far  above  our  power  to  add  or  detract.  The  world  will  little  note,  nor  long 
remember,  what  we  say  here,  but  it  cannot  forget  what  they  did  here.  It  is  for  us,  the 
living,  rather  to  be  dedicated  here  to  the  unfinished  work  which  they  who  fought  here 
have  thus  far  so  nobly  advanced. 

"The  Unfinished  Work."  Yes,  every  generation  leaves  to  its  successor 
an  unfinished  work.  The  work  of  society,  the  work  of  human  progress,  the 
work  of  civilization  is  never  completed.  We  build  upon  the  foundation  which 
we  find  already  laid  and  those  who  follow  us  take  up  the  work  where  we  leave 
off.  Those  who  fought  and  fell  thirty  years  ago  did  nobly  advance  the  work 
in  their  day,  for  they  led  the  nation  up  to  higher  grounds.  Theirs  was  the 
greatest  triumph  in  all  history.  Other  armies  have  been  inspired  by  love  of 
conquest  or  have  fought  to  repel  a  foreign  enemy,  but  our  armies  held 
within  the  Union  brethren  who  now  rejoice  at  their  own  defeat  and  glory  in 
the  preservation  of  the  nation  which  they  once  sought  to  dismember.  No 
greater  victory  can  be  won  by  citizens  or  soldiers  than  to  transform  temporary 
foes  into  permanent  friends.     But  let  me  quote  again: 

It  is  rather  for  us  to  be  here  dedicated  to  the  great  task  remaining  before  us;  that 
from  these  honored  dead  we  take  Increased  devotion  to  that  cause  for  which  they  gave  the 
last  full  measure  of  devotion;  that  we  here  highly  resolve  that  these  dead  shall  not  have 


66  BIOGRAPHY. 

died  in  vain;  that  this  nation,  under  God,   &hall  have  a  new  birth  of  freedom  and  that 
government  of  the  people,  by  the  people  and  for  the  people  shall  not  perish  from  the  earth.' 

Aye,  let  us  here  dedicate  ourselves  anew  to  this  unfinished  work  which 
requires  of  each  generation  constant  sacrifice  and  unceasing  care.  Pericles,  in 
speaking  of  tliose  who  fell  at  Salamis,  explained  the  loyalty  of  his  country- 
men when  he  said: 

It  was  for  such  a  country,  then,  that  these  men,  nobly  resolving  not  to  have  it  taken 
from  them,  fell  fighting  and  every  one  of  their  survivors  may  well  be  willing  to  suffer  in 
its  behalf.  /  / 

The  strength  of  a  nation  does  not  lie  in  forts,  nor  in  navies,  nor  yet  in 
great  standing  armies,  but  in  happy  and  contented  citizens,  who  are  ever  ready 
to  protect  for  themselves  and  to  preserve  for  posterity  the  blessings  which  they 
enjoy.  It  is  for  us  of  this  generation  to  so  perform  the  duties  of  citizenship 
that  a  "government  of  the  people,  by  the  people  and  for  the  people  shall  not 
perish  from  the  earth." 

As  a  conclusion  for  this  sketch,  I  have  asked  the  publishers  to  give 
a  picture  of  our  library,  the  place  where  Mr.  Bryan  spends  most  of 
his  time  when  at  home  and  where,  as  he  has  often  said,  his  happiest 
hours  are  passed.  Our  collection  of  books  is  more  complete  along  the 
lines  of  economic  subjects  and  in  the  works  and  lives  of  public  men. 
The  orations  of  Demosthenes  and  the  writings  of  Jeflferson  afford  him 
the  greatest  pleasure. 

To  give  an  estimate  of  his  character  or  of  the  mental  endowments 
which  he  may  possess,  would  be  beyond  the  scope  of  this  article.  I  may 
be  justified,  however,  in  saying  that  his  life  has  been  one  of  earnest  pur- 
pose, with  that  sort  of  genius  which  has  been  called  "a  capacity  for  hard 

work." 

Mary  Baird  Bryan. 

(Mary  Baird  Bryan,  only  child  of  John  and  Lovina  Baird,  the 

father  a  prosperous  merchant  of  Perry,  Illinois,  was  born  June  17, 

1861.     After  a  course  in  the  public  schools  she  attended  ]\Ionticello 

Seminary,  at  Godfrey,  Illinois,  for  one  year,  and  the  Presbyterian 

Academy  at  Jacksonville,  Illinois,  for  two  years,  graduating  from  the 

latter  institution  with  first  honors  in  June,  1881.     She  has  continued 

her  studies  since  graduation,  giving  special  attention  to  German.  After 

her  marriage,  in  1884,  she  read  law,  with  her  husband  as  instructor, 

taking  the  course  prescribed  in  the  Union  College  of  Law  (Chicago). 

She  was  admitted  to  practice  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  Nebraska  in 

November,  1888.    This  course  of  study  was  taken  up,  not  with  a  view 

to  entering  the  practice,  but  in  order  to  put  herself  in  closer  touch  with 

her  husband,  to  whom  she  has  been  a  real  helpmeet  in  every  sense  of 

the  term.    He  acknowledges  his  indebtedness  to  her  for  constant  and 

valuable  assistance  in  his  work.    She  is  devoted  to  her  home,  and  to 

her  children  has  been  both  mother  and  companion. — The  Publishers.) 


Pi 
< 

pq 


The  First  Battle 


THE  FIRST  BATTLE. 


CHAPTER  I. 


MY  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  SILVER  QUESTION  BEGINS. 

ON  the  30th  day  of  July,  1890,  I  was  nominated  for  Congress  in 
the  First  Nebraska  District  by  the  Democratic  party.     The 
platform  adopted  by  the  nominating  Convention  contained  the 
following  silver  plank : 

We  demand  the  free  coinage  of  silver  on  equal  terms  with  gold  and  de- 
nounce the  effort  of  the  Republican  party  to  serve  the  interests  of  Wall  street 
as  against  the  rights  of  the  people. 

I  wrote  the  plank  and  it  expressed  my  views  at  that  time.  The  Demo- 
cratic party  in  Congress  had,  only  a  short  time  before  the  holding  of  our 
Convention,  voted  strongly  in  favor  of  free  coinage  and  my  opponent, 
Hon.  W.  J.  Connell,  had  voted  with  the  Democrats.  Since  we  agreed 
upon  the  silver  question,  we  confined  our  campaign  almost  entirely  to 
the  discussion  of  the  McKinley  tariff  act,  for  which  he  had  voted 
When  I  spoke  upon  the  silver  question  at  all  it  was  only  briefly  and  the 
argument  made  was,  in  substance,  that  we  needed  more  money 
rather  than  less  and  that  the  use  of  both  metals  for  standard  money 
would  give  more  money  than  the  use  of  one  alone. 

After  the  election  I  determined  to  make  a  thorough  study  of  the 
money  question.  The  first  thing  read  was  a  little  pamphlet  issued 
by  the  Bimetallic  League  and  entitled  "Silver  in  the  Fifty^first 
Congress."  Professor  Laughlin's  book  on  bimetallism  was  next  read 
and  afterwards,  the  "Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  of  England"  and 
the  works  of  Jevons,  Bonamy  Price,  Cernuschi,  De  Laveleye,  Cheve- 
lier,  Jacobs  and  others.  By  this  time  the  agitation  upon  the  question 
had  reached  a  point  where  people  were  dividing  upon  the  subject  and  I 
was  pained  to  find  my  opinion  running  contrary  to  the  opinions  of 
many  with  whom  I  have  been  politically  intimate,  but  the  more  I 
investigated  the  question  the  deeper  my  convictions  became. 

In  April,  1 89 1,  I  attended  the  Western  States'  Commercial  Con- 
gress in  session  at  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  and  there  voted  for  free  coinage 

71 


72  MY  CONNECTION  WITH  SILVER  QUESTION  BEGINS. 

and  also  introduced,  and  secured  the  adoption  of,  the  following  decla- 
ration : 

Resolved,  That  it  is  the  sense  of  this  congress  that  all  legal  tender  money 
of  the  United  States  should  be  made  a  full  legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public 
and  private,  any  condition  in  the  contract  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding; 
provided  that  this  should  not  affect  contracts  already  in  existence. 

On  the  17th  of  September,  1891,1  attended  the  Democratic  State  Con- 
vention held  at  Grand  Island,  Nebraska,  and,  as  a  member  of  the  com- 
mittee on  resolutions,  secured  the  adoption  of  the  following  plank: 

We  favor  the  free  coinage  of  silver  and  demand  that  it  shall  be  made  a  full 
legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private;  and  we  denounce  as  unjust  and  dis- 
honest the  provisions  of  the  law  recently  enacted  allowing  parties  to  stipulate 
against  payment  in  silver  and  silver  certificates,  thus  setting  up  one  standard  for 
the  rich  man  and  another  for  the  poor  man. 

The  latter  part  of  the  plank  reproduced  the  idea  set  forth  in  the 
resolution  adopted  by  the  Western  States'  Commercial  Congress. 

In  the  Spring  of  1892  I  attended  the  Democratic  State  Convention 
which  was  held  at  Omaha  on  April  14th.  This  Convention  was  called 
to  select  delegates  to  the  Democratic  National  Convention.  There  was 
a  strong  sentiment  in  favor  of  Mr.  Cleveland's  renomination  and  the 
Convention  was  organized  against  silver  but  Mr.  Cleveland's  friends, 
knowing  his  position,  were  satisfied  to  avoid  the  question.  I  was 
made  a  member  of  the  Resolutions  Committee  by  a  vote  of  the  Con- 
vention and  presented  the  following  minority  report : 

We  declare  ourselves  in  favor  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver. 

We  had  a  warm  contest  over  this  plank,  the  vote  when  finally 
taken  being  so  close  that  both  sides  claimed  a  majority  and  the  roll 
was  called  a  second  time.  On  the  second  roll  call  the  silver  plank 
was  declared  lost  but  we  have  since  had  reason  to  believe  that  it 
was  carried  by  a  small  majority.  This  Convention  may  be  considered 
the  beginning  of  the  contest  in  Nebraska  between  the  two  wings  of  the 
Democratic  party.  I  was  at  that  time  opposed  to  Mr.  Cleveland's  re- 
nomination  because  of  his  attitude  on  the  money  question  and  favored 
the  nomination  of  Governor  Boies,  of  Iowa,  who  was,  in  my  judgment, 
nearest  to  our  position. 

I  was  renominated  for  Congress  on  the  day  before  the  meeting  of 
the  National  Convention.  My  platform  declared  for  free  coinage  and 
the  question  was  made  a  special  feature  in  the  Congressional  campaign. 
Just  before  the  adjournment  of  the  first  session  of  the  Fifty-second 
Congress,  my  attention  was  called  to  a  bill  introduced  by  Senator  Sher- 
man on  the  14th  day  of  July,  1892.  The  bill  will  be  found  in  my  third 
speech  against  unconstitutional  repeal. 


<zj't^,(^'    /^^^ 


/^-^-T^'Lx 


MY  CONNECTION  WITH  SILVER  QUESTION  BEGINS.         75 

As  soon  as  I  saw  this  bill  I  concluded  that  the  next  move  of  the 
opponents  of  free  coinage  would  be  to  secure  the  unconditional  repeal 
of  the  Sherman  law,  thus  leaving  no  provision  for  an  increase  in  silver 
coinage.  Taking  a  copy  of  the  bill  with  me  throughout  my  District  I 
pointed  out  the  probable  attempt  which  would  be  made  and  pledged 
myself  to  resist  it  to  the  extent  of  my  ability.  My  fears  proved  well 
founded,  since  it  was  only  a  little  more  than  a  year  afterward  that  Mr, 
Wilson  introduced  the  Administration  bill  for  unconditional  repeal  at 
the  opening  of  the  extraordinary  session  of  the  Fifty-third  Congress. 
His  bill  will  also  be  found  in  the  speech  above  referred  to. 

From  a  comparison  of  these  two  bills  it  is  evident  that  they  come 
from  the  same  source;  they  were  identical  in  purpose  and  almost 
identical  in  language. 

I  did  not  go  out  of  my  District  during  the  campaign  of  1892  and 
took  no  further  part  in  the  discussion  of  the  silver  question  until  the 
matter  came  up  in  the  House  of  Representatives  during  the  closing 
days  of  the  second  session  of  the  Fifty-second  Congress. 


CHAPTER  II. 


0 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

N  February  9th,  1893,  the  House  having  under  consideration  the 
following  resolution : 

Resolved,  That  immediately  upon  the  adoption  of  this  resolution  the  House  pro- 
ceed to  consider  H.  R.  10143,  "A  bill  to  increase  the  circulation  of  national  banks  and 
for  other  purposes,"  and  if  such  bill  shall  not  be  disposed  of  on  said  day,  then  the  con- 
sideration thereof  shall  be  conUnued  during  the  next  legislative  day. 

I  made  my  first  speech  against  unconditional  repeal.     It  is  given 

belo7/ : 

First  Speech  Against  Unconditional  Repeal. 

Mr.  Speaker:  We  oppose  the  consideration  of  this  bill  because  we  op- 
pose the  bill,  and  we  oppose  the  cloture  which  is  asked  in  order  to  secure  its 
passage,  because  the  Democratic  party  dare  not  go  before  the  people  and  tell 
them  they  refused  cloture  for  free  coinage — which  is  consistent  with  the  his- 
tory of  the  party;  for  the  tariff  bills  which  we  promised  to  pass,  and  for  the 
bill  for  the  election  of  United  States  Senators  by  the  people,  and  only  yielded 
to  it  at  the  dictation  of  the  moneyed  institutions  of  this  country  and  those 
who  want  to  appreciate  the  value  of  a  dollar. 

I  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  there  is  not  in  this  bill  a  single  line  or 
sentence  which  is  not  opposed  to  the  whole  history  of  the  Democratic  party. 
We  have  opposed  the  principle  of  the  national  bank  on  all  occasions,  and  yet 
you  give  them  by  this  bill  an  increased  currency  of  $15,000,000.  You  have 
pledged  the  party  to  reduce  the  taxation  upon  the  people,  and  yet,  before  you 
attempt  to  lighten  this  burden,  you  seek  to  take  off  one-half  million  of  dollars 
annually  from  the  national  banks  of  the  country;  and  even  after  declaring  in 
your  national  platform  that  the  Sherman  act  was  a  "cowardly  makeshift,"  you 
attempt  to  take  away  the  "makeshift"  before  you  give  us  the  real  thing  for 
which  the  makeshift  was  substituted. 

What  is  a  makeshift?  It  is  a  temporary  expedient.  And  yet  you  tell  us 
you  will  take  away  our  temporary  expedient  before  you  give  us  the  permanent 
good.  You  tell  a  man  who  is  fighting  with  a  club  that  it  is  a  miserable  make- 
shift and  that  he  ought  to  have  a  repeating  rifle;  and  yet  you  tell  him  to  throw 
away  his  club  and  wait  until  his  enemy  gives  him  the  rifle.  We  do  not  like 
the  present  law.  It  did  not  come  from  us.  The  Sherman  law  is  the  child  of 
the  opponents  of  free  coinage.  But  they  have  given  it  to  us,  and  we  will  hold 
it  as  a  hostage  until  they  return  to  us  our  own  child,  "the  gold  and  silver  coin- 
age of  the  Constitution."  They  kidnaped  it  twenty  years  ago,  and  we  shall  hold 
their  child,  ugly  and  deformed  as  it  is,  until  they  bring  ours  back  or  give  us 
something  better  than  the  makeshift  which  we  now  have. 

Mr.  Speaker,  consider  the  efYect  of  this  bill.  It  means  that  by  suspending 
the  purchase  of  silver  we  will  throw  54,000,000  ounces  on  the  market  annually 

76 


UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL.  77 

and  reduce  the  price  of  silver  bullion.  It  means  that  we  will  widen  the  differ- 
ence between  the  coinage  and  bullion  value  of  silver,  and  raise  a  greater  ob- 
stacle in  the  way  of  bimetallism.  It  means  to  increase  by  billions  of  dollars 
the  debts  of  our  people.  It  means  a  reduction  in  the  price  of  our  wheat  and 
cur  cotton.  You  have  garbled  the  platform  of  the  Democratic  party.  You 
have  taken  up  one  clause  of  it  and  refuse  to  give  us  a  fulfillment  of  the  other 
and  more  important  clause,  which  demands  that  gold  and  silver  shall  be  coined 
on  equal  terms  without  charge  for  mintage. 

Mr.  Speaker,  this  cannot  be  done.  A  man  who  murders  another  short- 
ens by  a  few  brief  years  the  life  of  a  human  being;  but  he  who  votes  to  in- 
crease the  burden  of  debts  upon  the  people  of  the  United  States  assumes  a  graver 
responsibility.  If  we  who  represent  them  consent  to  rob  our  people,  the  cot- 
ton-growers of  the  South  and  the  wheat-growers  of  the  West,  we  will  be  crim- 
inals whose  guilt  cannot  be  measured  by  words,  for  we  will  bring  distress  and 
disaster  to  our  people.  In  many  cases  such  a  vote  would  simply  be  a  sum- 
mons to  the  sheriff  to  take  possession  of  their  property. 

This  was  the  first  effort  made  to  secure  unconditional  repeal,  and 
there  was  coupled  with  it  a  proposition  to  allow  banks  to  issue  notes 
up  to  the  par  value  of  their  bonds  and  to  reduce  the  tax  on  circula- 
tion. It  is  significant  that  in  recent  years  the  effort  to  degrade  silver 
has  gone  hand  in  hand  with  the  effort  to  increase  the  control  of  national 
banks  over  the  issue  of  paper  money. 

A  little  later  in  the  same  month,  February  27th,  an  effort  was  made 
to  secure  authority  for  the  issue  of  short  time,  low  rate  bonds.  This  I 
believed  to  be  a  part  of  the  general  plan  to  secure  a  legislative  declara- 
tion favorable  to  gold  and  I  therefore  opposed  the  measure. 

From  what  had  already  taken  place  I  felt  sure  that  the  great  contest 
over  the  money  question  was  approaching  and  after  the  adjournment  of 
Congress  devoted  myself  to  preparation  for  it.  I  was  not  surprised, 
therefore,  when  the  President  called  Congress  together  in  extraordinary 
session  on  the  7th  day  of  August,  1893.  Mr.  Wilson  of  West  Virginia, 
chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  ]\Ieans,  introduced  the  Admin- 
istration measure,  to  which  I  have  heretofore  referred,  and  the  great 
parliamentary  struggle  began.  I  then  asserted,  and  still  believe,  that 
the  debate  over  the  repeal  bill  was  the  most  important  economic  dis- 
cussion which  ever  took  place  in  our  Congress.  On  the  i6th  day  of 
August,  1893.  near  the  close  of  the  debate,  I  delivered  the  following 
argument  in  opposition  to  unconditional  repeal. 

Principal  Speech  Against  Unconditional  Repeal. 
The  House  having  under  consideration  the  bill  (H.   R.   1)   to  repeal  the  purchasing 
clause  of  the  Sherman  act. 

Mr.  Speaker:  I  shall  accomplish  my  full  purpose  if  I  am  able  to  impress 
upon    the    members     of    the     House     the     far-reaching     consequences    which 


78  UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL. 

may  follow  our  action  and  quicken  their  appreciation  of  the  grave  re- 
sponsibility which  presses  upon  us.  Historians  tell  us  that  the  victory  of 
Charles  Martel  at  Tours  determined  the  history  of  all  Europe  for  centuries.  It 
was  a  contest  "between  the  Crescent  and  the  Cross."  and  when,  on  that  fateful 
day,  the  Prankish  prince  drove  back  the  followers  of  Abderrahman  he  rescued 
the  West  from  "the  all-destroying  grasp  of  Islam,"  and  saved  to  Europe  its 
Christian  civilization.  A  greater  than  Tours  is  here!  In  my  humble  judgment 
the  vote  of  this  House  on  the  subject  under  consideration  may  bring  to  the 
people  of  the  West  and  South,  to  the  people  of  the  United  States,  and  to  all  man- 
kind, weal  or  woe  beyond  the  power  of  language  to  describe  or  imagination 
to  conceive. 

In  the  princely  palace  and  in  the  humblest  hamlet;  by  the  financier  and  by 
the  poorest  toiler;  here,  in  Europe  and  everywhere,  the  proceedings  of  this 
Congress,  upon  this  problem  will  be  read  and  studied;  and  as  our  actions  bless 
or  blight  we  shall  be  commended  or  condemned.  The  President  of  the 
United  States,  in  the  discharge  of  his  duty  as  he  sees  it,  has  sent  to  Congress  a 
message  calling  attention  to  the  present  financial  situation,  and  recommending 
the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  as  the  only  means  of  securing 
immediate  relief.  Some  outside  of  this  hall  have  insisted  that  the  President's 
recommendation  imposes  upon  Democratic  members  an  obligation,  as  it  were, 
to  carry  out  his  wishes,  and  over-zealous  friends  have  even  suggested  that 
opposition  to  his  views  might  subject  the  hardy  dissenter  to  administrative  dis- 
pleasure. They  do  the  President  great  injustice  who  presume  that  he  would 
forget  for  a  moment  the  independence  of  the  two  branches  of  Congress.  He 
would  not  be  worthy  of  our  admiration  or  even  respect  if  he  demanded  a  hom- 
age which  would  violate  the  primary  principles  of  free  representative  govern- 
ment. 

Let  his  own  language  rebuke  those  who  would  disregard  their  pledges  to 
their  own  people  in  order  to  display  a  false  fealty.  In  the  message  which  he 
sent  to  Congress  in  December,  1885,  he  said,  in  words  which  may  well  be  our 
guide  in  this  great  crisis:  "The  zealous  watchfulness  of  our  constituencies, 
great  and  small,  supplements  their  suffrages,  and  before  the  tribunal  they  estab- 
lish every  public  servant  should  be  judged."  Among  the  many  grand  truths 
expressed  felicitously  by  the  President  during  his  public  career  none  show  a 
truer  conception  of  official  duty  or  describe  with  more  clearness  the  body  from 
which  the  member  receives  his  authority  and  to  which  he  owes  his  responsi- 
bility. 

Yes,  Mr.  Speaker,  it  is  before  the  tribunal  established  by  our  constituencies, 
and  before  that  tribunal  only  that  we  must  appear  for  judgment  upon  our 
actions  here.  When  we  each  accepted  a  commission  from  180,000  people  we 
pledged  ourselves  to  protect  their  rights  from  invasion  and  to  reflect  their 
wishes  to  the  best  of  our  ability,  and  we  must  stand  defenseless  before  the 
bar  if  our  only  excuse  is  "he  recommended  it."  And  remember,  sir,  that  these 
constituencies  include  not  bankers,  brokers,  and  boards  of  trade  only,  but 
embrace  people  in  every  station  and  condition  of  life;  and  in  that  great  court 
from  whose  decision  there  is  no  appeal  every  voter  has  an  equal  voice.  That 
the  Democratic  party  understands  the  duty  of  the  Representative,  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  it  found  it  necessary  to  nonconcur  in  a  similar  recommenda- 
tion made  by  the  President  in  1885. 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  79 

In  the  message  which  he  sent  to  the  Forty-ninth  Congress,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  first  session,  we  find  these  words: 

Prosperity  hesitates  upon  our  threshold  because  of  the  dangers  and  uncertainties 
surrounding  this  question.  Capital  timidly  shrinks  from  trade,  and  Investors  are  unwilling 
to  take  the  chance  of  the  questionable  shape  in  which  their  money  will  be  returned  to 
them,  while  enterprise  halts  at  a  risk  against  which  care  and  sagacious  management  do 
not  protect. 

As  a  necessary  consequence,  labor  lacks  employment,  and  suffering  and  distress 
are  visited  upon  a  portion  of  our  fellow-citizens  especially  entitled  to  the  careful  con- 
sideration of  those  charged  with  the  duties  of  legislation.  No  interest  appeals  to  us  so 
strongly  for  a  safe  and  stable  currency  as  the  vast  army  of  the  unemployed.  I  recom- 
mend the  suspension  of  the  compulsory  coinage  of  silver  dollars,  directed  by  the  law  passed 
in  February,  1878. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  same  forces  were  at  work  then  as  now;  the  same 
apprehensions  existed  as  now;  the  same  pressure  was  brought  from  the  same 
sources  in  favor  of  the  debasement  of  silver;  but  the  members  of  Congress, 
refusing  to  take  counsel  of  their  fears,  stood  by  the  record  of  both  great  parties 
and  by  the  Nation's  history  and  retained  the  coinage  of  silver  as  then  provided 
for.  Let  it  be  said  to  the  credit  of  the  Democratic  party  that  in  the  House 
only  thirty-three  of  its  members  voted  to  suspend  the  Bland  law,  while  130  are 
recorded  against  suspension.  Time  has  proved  that  the  members,  reflecting  the 
opinions  of  their  people,  were  wiser  than  the  Executive,  and  he  is  doubtless 
grateful  today  that  they  did  not  follow  his  suggestion. 

I  have  read  with  care  the  message  sent  to  us  last  week,  and  have  considered 
it  in  the  light  of  every  reasonable  construction  of  which  it  is  capable.  If  I  am 
able  to  understand  its  language  it  points  to  the  burial  of  silver,  with  no  promise 
of  resurrection.  Its  reasoning  is  in  the  direction  of  a  single  standard.  It  leads 
irresistibly  to  universal  gold  monometallism — to  a  realm  over  whose  door  is 
written:  "Abandon  hope,  all  ye  who  enter  here!"  Before  that  door  I  stop, 
appalled.  Have  gentlemen  considered  the  efifect  of  a  single  gold  standard 
universally  adopted?  Let  us  not  deceive  ourselves  with  the  hope  that  we  can 
discard  silver  for  gold,  and  that  other  nations  will  take  it  up  and  keep  it  as  a 
part  of  the  world's  currency.  When  all  the  silver  available  for  coinage  could 
gain  admission  to  some  mints  and  all  the  gold  available  for  coinage  would  find 
a  place  for  mintage,  and  some  nation  like  France  maintained  the  parity  by 
means  of  bimetallism  it  was  of  comparatively  little  importance  whether  a  par- 
ticular nation  used  silver,  or  gold,  or  both. 

Exchange  did  not  fluctuate  and  trade  could  be  carried  on  without  incon- 
venience. But  times  have  changed.  One  nation  after  another  has  closed  its 
mints  to  silver  until  the  white  metal  has,  in  European  countries,  been  made  an 
outcast  by  legislation  and  has  shown  a  bullion  value  different  from  its  coinage 
value.  India,  at  last,  guided  by  the  misrepresentations  of  the  metropolitan 
press,  which  proclaimed  as  certain  what  was  never  probable,  has  suspended 
free  coinage,  fearing  that  this  country  would  stop  the  purchase  of  silver.  If 
the  United  States,  the  greatest  silver  producing  nation,  which  now  utilizes 
more  than  one-third  of  the  total  annual  product  of  the  world,  closes  its  mint 
to  the  coinage  of  silver,  what  assurance  have  we  that  it  can  retain  its  place  as 
primary  money  in  the  commercial  world? 

Is  it  not  more  reasonable  to  suppose  that  a  further  fall  in  the  bullion 
value  of  silver  will  be  followed  by  a  demand  for  a  limitation  of  the  legal  tender 


80  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL 

qualities  of  the  silver  already  in  existence?  That  is  already  being  urged  by 
some.  Is  it  not  reasonable  to  suppose  that  our  hostile  action  will  lead  to  hostile 
action  on  the  part  of  other  nations?  Every  country  must  have  money  for  its 
people,  and  if  silver  is  abandoned  and  gold  substituted  it  must  be  drawn 
from  the  world's  already  scanty  supply.  We  hear  much  about  a  "stable 
currency"  and  an  "honest  dollar."  It  is  a  significant  fact  that  those  who 
have  spoken  in  favor  of  unconditional  repeal  have  for  the  most  part  avoided 
a  discussion  of  the  effect  of  an  appreciating  standard.  They  take  it  for 
granted  that  a  gold  standard  is  not  only  an  honest  standard,  but  the  only 
stable  standard.  I  denounce  that  child  of  ignorance  and  avarice,  the  gold  dol- 
lar under  a  universal  gold  standard,  as  the  most  dishonest  dollar  which  wc 
could  employ. 

I  stand  upon  the  authority  of  every  intelligent  writer  upon  political  econ- 
omy when  I  assert  that  there  is  not  and  never  has  been  an  honest  dollar.  An 
honest  dollar  is  a  dollar  absolutely  stable  in  relation  to  all  other  things. 
Laughlin,  in  his  woric  on  Bimetallism,  says: 

Monometallists  do  not— as  is  often  said— believe  that  gold  remains  absolutely  stable 
in  value.  They  hold  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  "standard  of  value"  for  ftlture  pay- 
ments in  either  gold  or  silver  which  remains  absolutely  invariable. 

He  even  suggests  a  multiple  standard  for  long-time  contracts.  I  quote  his 
words: 

As  regards  National  debts,  it  is  distinctly  averred  that  neither  gold  nor  silver 
forms  a  just  measure  of  deferred  payments,  and  that  if  justice  in  long  contracts  is  sought 
for,  we  should  not  seek  it  by  the  doubful  and  untried  expedient  of  international  bimetal- 
lism, but  by  the  clear  and  certain  method  of  a  multiple  standard,  a  unit  based  upon  the 
selling  prices  of  a  number  of  articles  of  general  consumption.  A  long-time  contract 
would  thereby  be  paid  at  its  maturity  by  the  same  purchasing  power  as  was  given  in  the 
beginning. 

Jevons,  one  of  the  most  generally  accepted  of  the  writers  in  favor  of  a 
gold  standard,  admits  the  instability  of  a  single  standard,  and  in  language  very 
similar  to  that  above  quoted  suggests  the  multiple  standard  as  the  most  equita- 
ble if  practicable.  Chevalier,  who  wrote  a  book  in  1858  to  show  the  injustice 
of  allowing  a  debtor  to  pay  his  debts  in  a  cheap  gold  dollar,  recognized  the 
same  fact,  and  said: 

If  the  value  of  the  metal  declined,  the  creditor  would  suffer  a  loss  upon  the  quantity 
he  had  received,  if,  on  the  contrary,  it  rose,  the  debtor  would  have  to  pay  more  than 
he  calculated  upon. 

I  am  on  sound  and  scientific  ground,  therefore,  when  I  say  that  a  dollar 
approaches  honesty  as  its  purchasing  power  approaches  stability.  If  I  borrow 
a  thousand  dollars  today  and  next  year  pay  the  debt  with  a  thousand  dollars  which 
will  secure  exactly  as  much  of  all  things  desirable  as  the  one  thousand  which 
I  borrowed,  I  have  paid  in  honest  dollars.  If  the  money  has  increased  or 
decreased  in  purchasing  power,  I  have  satisfied  my  debt  with  dishonest  dollars. 
While  the  Government  can  say  that  a  given  weight  of  gold  or  silver  shall  con- 
stitute a  dollar,  and  invest  that  dollar  with  legal-tender  qualities,  it  cannot  fix 
the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar.  That  must  depend  upon  the  law  of  supply 
and  demand,  and  it  may  be  well  to  suggest  that  this  Government  never  tried  to 
fix  the  exchangeable  value  of  a  dollar  until  it  began  to  limit  the  number  of 
dollars  coined 


UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL.  81 

If  the  number  of  dollars  increases  more  rapidly  than  the  need  for  dol- 
lars— as  it  did  after  the  gold  discoveries  of  1849 — the  exchangeable  value  of  each 
dollar  will  fall  and  prices  rise.  If  the  demand  for  dollars  increases  faster  than 
the  number  of  dollars — as  it  did  after  1800 — the  price  of  each  dollar  will  rise  and 
prices  generally  will  fall.  The  relative  value  of  the  dollar  may  be  changed 
by  natural  causes  or  by  legislation.  An  increased  supply — the  demand  remain- 
ing the  same — or  a  decreased  demand — the  supply  remaining  the  same — will 
reduce  the  exchangeable  value  of  each  dollar.  Natural  causes  may  act  on  both 
supply  and  demand;  as,  for  instance,  by  increasing  the  product  from  the  mines 
or  by  increasing  the  amount  consumed  in  the  arts.  Legislation  acts  directly 
on  the  demand,  and  thus  affects  the  price,  since  the  demand  is  one  of  the 
factors  in  fixing  the  price. 

If  by  legislative  action  the  demand  for  silver  is  destroyed  and  the  demand 
for  gold  is  increased  by  making  it  the  only  standard,  the  exchangeable  value 
of  each  unit  of  that  standard,  or  dollar,  as  we  call  it,  will  be  increased.  If  the 
exchangeable  value  of  the  dollar  is  increased  by  legislation  the  debt  of  the 
debtor  is  increased,  to  his  injury  and  to  the  advantage  of  the  creditor.  And 
let  me  suggest  here,  in  reply  to  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts  (Mr.  Mc- 
Call),  who  said  that  the  money  loaner  was  entitled  to  the  advantages  derived 
from  improved  machinery  and  inventive  genius,  that  he  is  mistaken.  The  labor- 
ing man  and  the  producer  are  entitled  to  these  benefits,  and  the  money  loaner, 
by  every  law  of  justice,  ought  to  be  content  with  a  dollar  equal  in  purchasing 
power  to  the  dollar  which  he  loaned,  and  any  one  desiring  more  than  that 
desires  a  dishonest  dollar,  it  matters  not  what  name  he  may  give  to  it.  Take  an 
illustration:  John  Doe,  of  Nebraska,  has  a  farm  worth  $2,000  and  mortgages 
it  to  Richard  Roe,  of  Massachusetts,  for  $1,000.  Suppose  the  value  of  the  mone- 
tary unit  is  increased  by  legislation  which  creates  a  greater  demand  for  gold. 
The  debt  is  increased.  If  the  increase  amounts  to  100  per  cent,  the  Nebraska 
farmer  finds  that  the  prices  of  his  products  have  fallen  one-half  and  his  land 
loses  one-half  its  value,  unless  the  price  is  maintained  by  the  increased  popu- 
lation incident  to  a  new  country. 

The  mortgage  remains  nominally  the  same,  though  the  debt  has  actually 
become  twice  as  great.  Will  he  be  deceived  by  the  cry  of  "honest  dollar?" 
If  he  should  loan  a  Nebraska  neighbor  a  hog  weighing  100  pounds  and  the 
next  spring  demand  in  return  a  hog  weighing  200  pounds  he  would  be  called 
dishonest,  even  though  he  contended  that  he  was  only  demanding  one  hog — 
just  the  number  he  loaned.  Society  has  become  accustomed  to  some  very 
nice  distinctions.  The  poor  man  is  called  a  socialist  if  he  believes  that  the 
wealth  of  the  rich  should  be  divided  among  the  poor,  but  the  rich  man  is 
called  a  financier  if  he  devises  a  plan  by  which  the  pittance  of  the  poor  can 
be  converted  to  his  use. 

The  poor  man  who  takes  property  by  force  is  called  a  thief,  but  the  creditor 
who  can  by  legislation  make  a  debtor  pay  a  dollar  twice  as  large  as  he  bor- 
rowed is  lauded  as  the  friend  of  a  sound  currency.  The  man  who  wants  the 
people  to  destroy  the  Government  is  an  anarchist,  but  the  man  who  wants  the 
Government  to  destroy  the  people  is  a  patriot. 

The  great  desire  now  seems  to  be  to  restore  confidence,  and  some  have 
an  idea  that  the  only  way  to  restore  confidence  is  to  coax  the  money  loaner 


B2  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

to  let  go  of  his  hoard  by  making  the  profits  too  tempting  to  be  resisted. 
Capital  is  represented  as  a  shy  and  timid  maiden  who  must  be  courted,  if 
won.  Let  me  suggest  a  plan  for  bringing  money  from  Europe.  If  it  be  pos- 
sible, let  us  enact  a  law  "Whereas  confidence  must  be  restored;  and  whereas 
money  will  always  come  from  its  hiding  place  if  the  inducement  is  sufficient, 
Therefore,  be  it  enacted.  That  every  man  who  borrows  $i  shall  pay  back  $2 
and  interest  (the  usury  law  not  to  be  enforced)." 

Would  not  English  capital  come  "on  the  swiftest  ocean  greyhounds?" 
The  money  loaner  of  London  would  say:  "I  will  not  loan  in  India  or  Egypt 
or  in  South  America.  The  inhabitants  of  those  countries  are  a  wicked  and 
ungodly  people  and  refuse  to  pay  more  than  they  borrowed.  I  will  loan  in 
the  United  States,  for  there  lives  an  honest  people,  who  delight  in  a  sound 
currency  and  pay  in  an  honest  dollar."  Why  does  not  some  one  propose  that 
plan?  Because  no  one  would  dare  to  increase  by  law  the  number  of  dollars 
which  the  debtor  must  pay,  and  yet  by  some  it  is  called  wise  statesmanship  to 
do  indirectly  and  in  the  dark  what  no  man  has  the  temerity  to  propose 
directly  and  openly. 

We  have  been  called  cranks  and  lunatics  and  idiots  because  we  have  warned 
our  fellow-men  against  the  inevitable  and  intolerable  consequences  which  would 
follow  the  adoption  of  a  gold  standard  by  all  the  world.  But  who,  I  ask,  can  be 
silent  in  the  presence  of  such  impending  calamities?  The  United  States,  Eng- 
land, France,  and  Germany  own  today  about  $2,600,000,000  of  the  world's 
supply  of  gold  coin,  or  about  five-sevenths  of  the  total  amount,  and  yet  these 
four  nations  contain  but  a  small  fraction  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  globe. 
What  will  be  the  exchangeable  value  of  a  gold  dollar  when  India's  people,  out- 
numbering alone  the  inhabitants  of  the  four  great  nations  named,  reach  out 
after  their  share  of  gold  coin?  What  will  be  the  final  price  of  gold  when  all 
the  nations  of  the  Occident  and  Orient  join  in  the  scramble? 

A  distinguished  advocate  of  the  gold  standard  said  recently,  in  sub- 
stance: "Wheat  has  now  reached  a  point  where  the  English  can  afford  to 
buy  it,  and  gold  will  soon  return  to  relieve  our  financial  embarrassment."  How 
delighted  the  farmer  will  be  when  he  realizes  what  an  opportunity  he  has  to 
save  his  country!  A  nation  in  distress;  banks  failing;  mines  closed;  laborers 
unemployed;  enterprise  at  a  standstill,  and  behold,  the  farmer,  bowed  with  un- 
ceasing, even  if  unremunerative,  toil,  steps  forth  to  save  his  country — by  sell- 
ing his  wheat  below  the  cost  of  production!  And  I  am  afraid  he  will  even  now 
be  censured  for  allowing  the  panic  to  go  as  far  as  it  has  before  reducing  his 
prices. 

It  seems  cruel  that  upon  the  growers  of  wheat  and  cotton,  our  staple 
exports,  should  be  placed  the  burden  of  supplying  us,  at  whatever  cost,  with 
the  necessary  gold,  and  yet  the  financier  quoted  has  suggested  the  only  means, 
except  the  issue  of  bonds,  by  which  our  stock  of  gold  can  be  replenished.  If 
it  is  dif^cult  now  to  secure  gold,  what  will  be  the  condition  when  the  demand 
is  increased  by  its  adoption  as  the  world's  only  primary  money?  We  would 
simply  put  gold  upon  an  auction  block,  with  every  nation  as  a  bidder,  and 
each  ounce  of  the  standard  metal  would  be  knocked  down  to  the  one  offering 
the  most  of  all  other  kinds  of  property.  Every  disturbance  of  finance  in  one 
country  would  communicate  itself  to  every  other,  and  in  the  misery  which 


UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL.  83 

would  follow  it  would  be  of  little  consolation  to  know  that  others  were  suffer- 
ing as  much  as,  or  more  than,  we. 

I  have  only  spoken  of  the  immediate  effects  of  the  substitution  of  gold  as 
the  world's  only  money  of  ultimate  redemption.  The  worst  remains  to  be 
told.  If,  as  in  the  resumption  of  specie  payments  in  1879,  we  could  look  for- 
ward to  a  time  when  the  contraction  would  cease,  the  debtor  might  become  a 
tenant  upon  his  former  estate  and  the  home  owner  assume  the  role  of  the 
homeless  with  the  sweet  assurance  that  his  children  or  his  children's  children 
might  live  to  enjoy  the  blessings  of  a  "stable  currency."  But,  sir,  the  hapless 
and  hopeless  producer  of  wealth  goes  forth  into  a  night  illuminated  by  no 
star;  he  embarks  upon  a  sea  whose  further  shore  no  mariner  may  find;  he 
travels  in  a  desert  where  the  ever-retreating  mirage  makes  his  disappointment 
a  thousand-fold  more  keen.  Let  the  world  once  commit  its  fortunes  to  the 
use  of  gold  alone  and  it  must  depend  upon  the  annual  increase  of  that  metal 
to  keep  pace  with  the  need  for  money. 

The  Director  of  the  Mint  gives  about  $130,000,000  as  the  world's  production 
last  year.  Something  like  one-third  is  produced  in  connection  with  silver, 
and  must  be  lost  if  silver  mining  is  rendered  unproductive.  It  is  estimated  that 
nearly  two-thirds  of  the  annual  product  is  used  in  the  arts,  and  the  amount 
so  used  is  increasing.  Where,  then,  is  the  supply  to  meet  the  increasing  de- 
mands of  an  increasing  population?  Is  there  some  new  California  or  some  un- 
discovered Australia  yet  to  be  explored? 

Is  it  not  probable  that  the  supply  available  for  coinage  will  diminish  rather 
than  increase?  Jacobs,  in  his  work  on  the  Precious  Metals,  has  calculated  the 
appreciation  of  the  monetary  unit.  He  has  shown  that  the  almost  imperceptible 
increase  of  2  per  cent,  per  year  will  amount  to  a  total  appreciation  of  500  per 
cent,  in  a  century.  Or,  to  illustrate,  that  cotton  at  10  cents  today  and  wheat 
at  60  cents  would  mean  cotton  at  2  cents  and  wheat  at  12  cents  in  one  hundred 
years.  A  national.  State  or  municipal  debt  renewed  from  time  to  time  would, 
at  the  end  of  that  period,  be  six  times  as  great  as  when  contracted,  although 
several  times  the  amount  would  have  been  paid  in  interest. 

When  one  realizes  the  full  significance  of  a  constantly  appreciating  standard 
he  can  easily  agree  with  Alison  that  the  Dark  Ages  resulted  from  a  failure  of 
the  money  supply.  How  can  anyone  view  with  unconcern  the  attempt  to 
turn  back  the  tide  of  civilization  by  the  complete  debasement  of  one-half  of  the 
world's  money!  When  I  point  to  the  distress  which,  not  suddenly,  but  gradu- 
ally is  entering  the  habitations  of  our  people;  when  I  refer  you  to  the  census 
as  conclusive  evidence  of  the  unequal  distribution  of  wealth  and  of  increasing 
tenancy  among  our  people,  of  whom,  in  our  cities,  less  than  one-fourth  now  own 
their  homes;  when  I  suggest  the  possibility  of  this  condition  continuing  until 
passed  from  a  land  of  independent  owners,  we  become  a  nation  of  landlords  and 
tenants,  you  must  tremble  for  civil  liberty  itself. 

Free  government  cannot  long  survive  when  the  thousands  enjoy  the  wealth 
of  the  country  and  the  million  share  its  poverty  in  common.  Even  now  you 
hear  among  the  rich  an  occasionally  expressed  contempt  for  popular  govern- 
ment, and  among  the  poor  a  protest  against  legislation  which  makes  them  "toil 
that  others  may  reap."  I  appeal  to  you  to  restore  justice  and  bring  back 
prosperity  whik  yet  a  peaceable  solution  can  be  secured.    We  mourn  the  lot  of 


84  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

unhappy  Ireland,  whose  alien  owners  drain  it  of  its  home  created  wealth; 'but 
we  may  reach  a  condition,  if  present  tendencies  continue,  when  her  position  at 
this  time  will  be  an  object  of  envy,  and  some  poet  may  write  of  our  cities  as 
Goldsmith  did  of  the  "Deserted  Village:" 

While    scourged    by    famine    from    a    smiling    land, 

The  mournful  peasant  leads  his  humble  band, 

And,  while  he  sinks  without  one  hand  to  save, 

The  country  blooms— a  garden  and  a  grave. 

But,  lest  I  may  be  accused  of  reasonless  complaining,  let  me  call  unimpeach- 
able witnesses  who  will  testify  to  the  truth  of  my  premises  and  to  the  correct- 
ness of  my  conclusions. 

Jevons  says: 

If  all  nations  of  the  globe  were  suddenly  and  simultaneously  to  demoneUze  silver 
and  require  gold  money  a  revolution  in  the  value  of  gold  would  be  inevitable. 

Giffin,  who  is  probably  the  most  fanatical  adherent  of  the  gold  standard, 
says,  in  his  book  entitled  The  Case  Against  Bimetallism: 

The  primary  offender  in  the  matter,  perhaps,  was  Germany,  which  made  a  mis- 
take, as  I  believe,  in  substituting  gold  for  silver  as  the  standard  money  of  the  country. 
•  *  •  To  some  extent  also  Italy  has  been  an  offender  in  this  matter,  the  resumption 
of  specie  payments  in  that  country  on  a  gold  basis  being  entirely  a  work  of  superfluity; 
the  resumption  on  a  silver  basis  would  have  been  preferable.  *  *  *  No  doubt  the  pres- 
sure on  gold  would  have  been  more  severe  than  it  has  been  if  the  United  States  had 
cot  passed  the  Bland  coinage  law. 

The  gentleman  from  Maryland  (Mr.  Rayner)  said  in  the  opening  speech 
of  this  debate: 

In  my  opinion  there  is  not  a  sufficient  amount  of  gold  in  existence  to  supply  the 
demands  of  commerce  and  the  necessities  of  the  world's  circulation. 

Mr.  Balfour,  member  of  Parliament,  in  a  speech  recently  made,  said: 

Let  Germany,  India,  and  the  United  States  try  a  gold  currency  and  a  tremor  seizes 
every  one  of  our  commercial  magnates.  They  look  forward,  in  the  immediate  future, 
to  catastrophe,  and  feel  that  the  ultimate  result  may  be  a  slow  appreciation  of  the  stand- 
ard of  value,  which  is  perhaps  the  most  deadening  and  benumbing  influence  that  can 
touch  the  enterprise  of  a  nation. 

Mr.  Goschen,  delegate  from  Great  Britain,  said  at  the  International  Mone- 
tary Conference  in   1878: 

If,  however,  other  States  were  to  carry  on  a  propaganda  in  favor  of  a  gold  stand- 
ard and  the  demonetization  of  silver,  the  Indian  government  would  be  obliged  to  recon- 
sider Its  position  and  might  be  forced  by  events  to  take  measures  similar  to  those  taken 
elsewhere.  In  that  case  the  scramble  to  get  rid  of  silver  might  provoke  one  of  the  grav- 
est crises  ever  undergone  by  -commerce.  One  or  two  States  might  demonetize  silver 
without  serious  results,  but  if  all  demonetize  there  would  be  no  buyers,  and  silver  would 
fall  in  alarming  proportions.  *  *  *  If  all  States  should  resolve  on  the  adoption  of 
a  gold  standard,  the  question  arose,  would  there  be  sufficient  gold  for  the  purpose  with- 
out a  tremendous  crisis?  There  would  be  a  fear  on  the  one  hand  of  a  depreciation  of 
silver,  and  one  on  the  other  of  a  rise  in  the  value  of  gold,  and  a  corresponding  fall  in 
the  prices  of  all  commodities. 

Italy,  Russia,  and  Austria,  whenever  they  resume  specie  payments,  would  require 
metal,  and  if  all  other  States  went  In  the  direction  of  a  gold  standard,  these  countries 
too  would  be  forced  to  take  gold.  Resumption  on  their  part  would  be  facilitated  by  the 
maintenance  of  silver  as  a  part  of  the  legal  tender  of  the  world.  The  American  pro- 
posal for  a  universal  double  standard  seemed  impossible  of  realization,  a  veritable  Utopia; 
but  the  theory  of  a  universal  gold  standard  was  Utopian,  and  indeed  involved  a  false 
Utopia.  It  was  better  for  the  world  at  large  that  the  two  metals  should  continue  in  cir- 
culation than  that  one  should  be  universally  substituted  for  the  other. 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  ,8S 

Thus  does  an  eminent  English  monometallist  denounce  the  idea  of  a 
universal  gold  standard  and  foretell  its  consequences.  But  we  are  not  de- 
pendent for  authority  upon  foreign  advocates  of  a  gold  standard.  Read  the 
words  of  him  who  for  many  years  was  the  guiding  genius  of  the  Republican 
party,  Hon.  James  G.  Blaine,  and  say  whether  he  was  a  lunatic  because  he 
described  in  emphatic  words  the  dangers  attendant  upon  universal  monometal- 
lism.   He  said  upon  the  floor  of  the  House,  February  7,  1878: 

On  the  much  vexed  and  long  mooted  question  as  to  a  bimetallic  or  monometallic 
standard,  my  own  views  are  sufficiently  indicated  In  the  remarks  I  have  made.  I  believe  the 
struggle  now  going  on  in  this  country  and  in  other  countries  for  a  single  gold  standard 
would,  if  successful,  produce  widespread  disaster  in  and  throughout  the  commercial  world. 

The  destruction  of  silver  as  money  and  establishing  gold  as  the  sole  unit  of  value 
must  have  a  ruinous  effect  on  all  forms  of  property  except  those  investments  which  yield 
a  fixed  return  in  money.  These  would  be  enormously  enhanced  In  value,  and  would  gain 
a  disproportionate  and  unfair  advantage  over  every  other  species  of  property.  If,  as  the 
most  reliable  statistics  affirm,  there  are  nearly  ?7, 000,000,000  of  coin  or  bullion  in  the 
world,  not  very  unequally  divided  between  gold  and  silver,  it  is  impossible  to  strike 
silver  out  of  existence  as  money  without  results  which  will  prove  distressing  to  millions 
and   utterly   disastrous  to   tens   of   thousands. 

Again,  he  said: 

I  believe  gold  and  silver  coin  to  be  the  money  of  the  Constitution;  indeed,  the 
money  of  the  American  people,  anterior  to  the  Constitution  which  the  great  organic 
law  recognized  as  quite  independent  of  its  own  existence.  No  power  was  conferred 
on  Congress  to  declare  either  metal  should  not  be  money.  Congress  has,  therefore,  in 
my  judgment,  no  power  to  demonetize  silver  any  more  than  to  demonetize  gold. 

Senator  Sherman  said  in  i86g: 

The  contraction  of  the  currency  Is  a  far  more  distressing  operation  than  Senators 
suppose.  Our  own  and  other  nations  have  gone  through  that  operation  before.  It  is  not 
possible  to  take  that  voyage  without  the  sorest  distress.  To  every  person  except  a  cap- 
italist out  of  debt,  or  a  salaried  officer  or  annuitant.  It  is  a  period  of  loss,  danger, 
lassitude  of  trade,  fall  of  wages,  suspension  of  enterprise,  bankruptcy,  and  disaster.  It 
means  ruin  of  all  dealers  whose  debts  are  twice  their  business  capital,  though  one-third 
less  than  their  actual  property.  It  means  the  fall  of  all  agricultural  production  without 
any  great  reduction  of  taxes.  What  prudent  man  would  dare  to  build  a  bouse,  a  rail- 
road, a  factory,  or  a  barn  with  this  certain  fact  before  him? 

Let  me  quote  from  an  apostle  of  the  Democratic  faith,  whose  distinguished 
services  in  behalf  of  his  party  and  his  country  have  won  for  him  the  esteem  of 
all.  Mr.  Carlisle,  then  a  member  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  said, 
February  21,  1878: 

I  know  that  the  world's  stock  of  precious  metals  is  none  too  large,  and  I  see  no 
reason  to  apprehend  that  It  will  ever  be  so.  Mankind  will  be  fortunate  Indeed  If  the 
annual  production  of  gold  and  silver  coin  shall  keep  pace  with  the  annual  increase 
of  population,  and  industry.  According  to  my  views  of  the  subject  the  conspiracy  which 
seems  to  have  been  formed  here  and  in  Europe  to  destroy  by  legislation  and  otherwise 
from  three-sevenths  to  one-half  the  metallic  money  of  the  world  is  the  most  gigantic 
crime  of  this  or  any  other  age.  The  consummation  of  such  a  scheme  would  ultimately 
entail  more  misery  upon  the  human  race  than  all  the  wars,  pestilences,  and  famines  that 
ever  occurred  in  the  history  of  the  world. 

The  absolute  and  Instantaneous  destruction  of  half  the  entire  movable  property  of 
the  world,  including  houses,  ships,  railroads,  and  other  appliances  for  carrying  on  com- 
merce, while  it  would  be  felt  more  sensibly  at  the  moment,  would  not  produce  anything 
like  the  prolonged  distress  and  disorganization  of  society  that  must  inevitably  result 
from  the  permanent  annihilation  of  one-half  the  metallic  money  of  the  world. 

The  junior  Senator  from  Texas  (Mr.  Mills)  never  did  the  party  greater 
service  than  when,  on  the  3rd  of  February,  1886,  on  this  floor  he  denounced,  in 


86  UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL. 

language,  the  force  and  earnestness  of  which  can  not  be  surpassed,  the  attempted 
crime  against  silver.     Let  his  words  be  an  inspiration  now: 

But  In  all  the  wild,  reckless,  and  remorseless  brutalities  that  have  marked  the  foot- 
prints of  resistless  power  there  is  Some  extenuating  circumstance  that  mitigates  the 
severity  of  the  punishment  due  the  crime.  Some  have  been  the  product  of  the  fierce 
passions  of  war,  some  have  come  from  the  antipathy  that  separates  alien  races,  some  from 
the  superstitions  of  opposing  religions. 

But  the  crime  that  is  now  sought  to  be  perpetrated  on  more  than  fifty  millions  of 
people  comes  neither  from  the  camp  of  a  conqueror,  the  hand  of  a  foreigner,  nor  the 
altar  of  an  idolator.  But  it  comes  from  those  in  whose  veins  runs  the  blood  of  the 
common  ancestry,  who  were  born  under  the  same  skies,  speak  the  same  language, 
reared  in  the  same  institutions,  and  nurtured  in  the  principles  of  the  same  religious 
faith.  It  comes  from  the  cold,  phlegmatic,  marble  heart  of  avarice— avarice  that  seeks 
to  paralyze  labor,  increase  the  burden  of  debt,  and  fill  the  land  with  destitution  and 
suffering  to  gratify  the  lust  for  gold — avarice  surrounded  by  every  comfort  that  wealth  can 
command,  and  rich  enough  to  satisfy  every  want  save  that  which  refuses  to  be  satisfied 
without  the  suffocation  and  strangulation  of  all  the  labor  of  the  land.  With  a  forehead 
that  refuses  to  be  ashamed  It  demands  of  Congress  an  act  that  will  paralyze  all  the 
forces  of  production,  shut  out  labor  from  all  employment,  increase  the  burden  of  debts 
and  taxation,  and  send  desolation  and  suffering  to  all  the  homes  of  the  poor. 

Can  language  be  stronger  or  conclusion  more  conclusive?  What  expres- 
sion can  be  more  forcible  than  the  "most  gigantic  crime  of  this  or  any  other 
age?"  What  picture  more  vivid  than  that  painted  in  the  words,  "The  con- 
summation of  such  a  scheme  would  ultimately  entail  more  misery  upon  the 
human  race  than  all  the  wars,  pestilences,  and  famines  that  ever  occurred  in 
the  history  of  the  world?"  What  more  scathing  rebuke  could  be  administered 
to  avarice  than  that  contained  in  the  words  of  Mr.  Mills? 

It  is  from  the  awful  horrors  described  by  these  distinguished  men,  differing 
in  politics,  but  united  in  sentiment,  that  I  beg  you,  sirs,  to  save  your  fellow-men. 

On  the  base  of  the  monument  erected  by  a  grateful  people  to  the  memory 
of  the  late  Senator  Hill,  of  Georgia,  are  inscribed  these  words: 

Who  saves  his  country  saves  himself,  and  all  things  saved  do  bless  him.  Who 
lets  his  country  die  lets  all  things  die,  dies  himself  ignobly,  and  all  things  dying,  curse  him. 

If,  sirs,  in  saving  your  country  you  save  yourselves  and  earn  the  benedic- 
tions of  all  things  saved,  how  much  greater  will  be  your  reward  if  your  efforts 
save  not  your  country  only  but  all  mankind!  If  he  who  lets  his  country  die, 
brings  upon  himself  the  curses  of  all  things  dying;  in  what  language  will  an 
indignant  people  express  their  execration,  if  your  action  lead  to  the  enslavement 
of  the  great  majority  of  the  people  by  the  universal  adoption  of  an  appreciating 
standard! 

Let  me  call  your  attention  briefly  to  the  advantages  of  bimetallism.  It  is 
not  claimed  that  by  the  use  of  two  metals  at  a  fixed  ratio  absolute  stability  can 
be  secured.  We  only  contend  that  thus  the  monetary  unit  will  become  more 
stable  in  relation  to  other  property  than  under  a  single  standard.  If  a  single 
standard  were  really  more  desirable  than  a  double  standard,  we  are  not  free 
to  choose  gold,  and  would  be  compelled  to  select  silver.  Gold  and  silver  must 
remain  component  parts  of  the  metallic  money  of  the  world — that  must  be 
accepted  as  an  indisputable  fact.  Our  abandonment  of  silver  would  in  all  proba- 
bility drive  it  out  of  use  as  primary  money;  and  silver  as  a  promise  to  pay  gold 
is  little,  if  any,  better  than  a  paper  promise  to  pay.  If  bimetallism  is  impossible, 
then  we  must  make  up  our  minds  to  a  silver  standard  or  to  the  abandonment 
of  both  gold  and  silver. 


UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL.  87 

Let  us  suppose  the  worst  that  has  been  prophesied  by  our  opponents, 
namely,  that  we  would  be  upon  a  silver  standard  if  we  attempted  the  free 
coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  at  any  ratio.  Let  us  suppose  that  all  our  gold 
goes  to  Europe  and  we  have  only  silver.  Silver  would  not  be  inconvenient 
to  use,  because  a  silver  certificate  is  just  as  convenient  to  handle  as  a  gold  cer- 
tificate, and  the  silver  itself  need  not  be  handled  except  where  it  is  necessary  for 
change.  Gold  is  not  handled  among  the  people.  No  one  desires  to  accept 
any  large  amount  in  gold.  The  fact  that  the  Treasury  has  always  on  hand 
a  large  amount  of  gold  coin  deposited  in  exchange  for  gold  certificates  shows 
that  the  paper  representative  is  more  desirable  than  the  metal  itself.  If,  follow- 
ing out  the  supposition,  our  gold  goes  abroad,  Europe  will  have  more  money 
with  which  to  buy  our  exports — cotton  and  wheat,  cattle  and  hogs. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  we  adopt  gold,  we  must  draw  it  from  Europe,  and 
thus  lessen  their  money  and  reduce  the  price  of  our  exports  in  foreign  mar- 
kets. This,  too,  would  decrease  the  total  value  of  our  exports  and  increase 
the  amount  of  products  which  it  would  be  necessary  to  send  abroad  to  pay  the 
principal  and  interest  which  we  owe  to  bondholders  and  stockholders  residing 
in  Europe.  Some  have  suggested  the  advisability  of  issuing  gold  bonds  in 
order  to  maintain  a  gold  standard.  Let  them  remember  that  those  bonds  sold 
in  this  country  will  draw  money  from  circulation  and  increase  the  stringency, 
and  sold  abroad  will  afTect  injuriously  the  price  of  our  products  abroad,  thus 
making  a  double  tax  upon  the  toilers  of  the  United  States,  who  must  ultimately 
pay  them. 

Let  them  remember,  too,  that  gold  bonds  held  abroad  must  some  time  be 
paid  in  gold,  and  the  exportation  of  that  gold  would  probably  raise  a  clamor 
for  an  extension  of  time  in  order  to  save  this  country  from  another  stringency. 
A  silver  standard,  too,  would  make  us  the  trading  center  of  all  the  silver-using 
countries  of  the  world,  and  these  countries  contain  far  more  than  one-half  of  the 
world's  population.  What  an  impetus  would  be  given  to  our  Western  and 
Southern  seaports,  such  as  San  Francisco,  Galveston,  New  Orleans,  Mobile, 
Savannah,  and  Charleston!  Then,  again,  we  produce  our  silver,  and  produce  it 
in  quantities  which  would  to  some  extent  satisfy  our  monetary  needs. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Hunter  the  time  of  Mr.  Bryan  was  extended  indefinitely. 

Mr.  Bryan.     I  thank  the  gentleman  from  Illinois  and  the  House. 

Our  annual  product  of  gold  is  less  than  50  cents  per  capita.  Deduct  from 
this  sum  the  loss  which  would  be  occasioned  to  the  gold  supply  by  the  closing 
of  our  silver  mines,  which  produce  gold  in  conjunction  with  silver;  deduct, 
also,  the  amount  consumed  in  the  arts,  and  the  amount  left  for  coinage  is  really 
inconsiderable.  Thus,  with  a  gold  standard,  we  would  be  left  dependent  upon 
foreign  powers  for  our  annual  money  supply.  They  say  we  must  adopt  a  gold 
standard  in  order  to  trade  with  Europe.  Why  not  reverse  the  proposition  and 
say  that  Europe  must  resume  the  use  of  silver  in  order  to  trade  with  us?  But 
why  adopt  either  gold  or  silver  alone?  Why  not  adopt  both  and  trade  with 
both  gold-using  and  silver-using  countries?  The  principle  of  bimetallism  is 
established  upon  a  scientific  basis. 

The  Government  does  not  try  to  fix  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar, 
either  gold  or  silver.  It  simply  says,  in  the  language  of  Thomas  Jefferson, 
"The  money  unit  shall  stand  upon  the  two  metals,"  and  then  allows  the  ex- 


88  UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL. 

changeable  value  of  that  unit  to  rise  or  fall  according  as  the  total  product  of 
both  metals  decreases  or  increases  in  proportion  to  the  demand  for  money.  In 
attempting  to  maintain  the  parity  between  the  two  metals  at  a  fixed  ratio, 
the  Government  does  not  undertake  the  impossible.  France  for  several  years 
did  maintain  the  parity  approximately  at  15^  to  i  by  offering  unlimited  coinage 
to  both  metals  at  that  ratio.  It  is  very  common  for  some  people  to  urge, 
"You  cannot  put  value  into  anything  by  law,"  and  I  am  sorry  to  see  some  pro- 
claim this  who  know  by  rich  experience  how  easy  it  is  for  the  Government  to 
legislate  prices  up  or  down. 

We  were  called  together  to  relieve  financial  distress  by  legislation.  Some 
propose  to  relieve  the  present  stringency  of  the  money  market  by  removing  the 
tax  on  national  bank  circulation  and  allowing  banks  to  issue  100  per  cent,  on 
their  bonds  instead  of  90  per  cent.  This  legislation  would  put  value  into  bank 
stocks  by  law,  because  it  would  add  to  the  profits  of  the  bank,  and  such  a  law 
would  probably  raise  the  market  price  of  bonds  by  increasing  the  demand  for 
them.  I  will  not  discuss  the  merits  of  this  proposition  now.  Let  those  who 
favor  it  prepare  to  justify  themselves  before  their  constituents.  The  New  York 
World  of  August  3  contained  an  article  encouraging  the  banks  to  issue  more 
money  under  the  present  law.     It  showed  the  profits  as  follows: 

These   bonds   are  selling  now   at   109   to   110.    At   this    latter   period   a   $100,000  bond 
transaction  would  stand  as  follows: 
$100,000  U.  S.  4's  at  110,  less  1-3  per  cent,  accrued  interest,  $109,666  net,  would 

cost    $109,666 

Less    circulation    issued    on    this   amount 90,000 

Making    the    actual    cash    investment    only $19,666 

On  which  the  bank  would  receive  an  income  of  over  12%  per  cent.,  as  follows: 

Interest    on    $100,000    4's    per    annum $4,000 

Less  tax  1  per  cent,  on  circulation $900 

Less  sinking  fund   to  retire  premium  to  be  improved  at  6  per  cent 464 

Less    expenses 100 

1,464 

Net    income $2,536 

Already  a  good  portion  of  these  bonds  held  in  reserve  are  coming  Into  the  market 
and  will  soon  find  their  way  into  the  hands  of  national  banks. 

If  the  proposed  law  is  adopted  $900  will  be  taken  from  the  expense  column 
by  the  repeal  of  the  tax  on  circulation  and  $10,000  will  be  taken  from  the  cost 
of  investment,  so  that  the  profits  would  amount  to  $3,436  on  an  investment 
of  $9,666,  or  more  than  22  per  cent.  If,  however,  the  increased  demand  for 
bonds  raised  the  premium  to  15  per  cent,  we  could  only  calculate  a  little  less 
than  $3,436  on  an  investment  of  $14,666,  or  nearly  25  per  cent.  This  they 
would  probably  call  a  fair  divide.  The  bondholder  would  receive  an  advantage 
in  the  increased  premium  of,  say,  $25,000,000,  and  the  national  bank  would  be 
able  to  make  about  double  on  its  investment  what  it  does  now.  If  the  pre- 
mium should  increase  more  than  5  per  cent,  the  bondholder  would  make  more 
and  the  bank  less.  If  the  premium  should  not  increase  that  much  the  bond- 
holder would  make  less  and  the  bank  more. 

Let  those,  I  repeat,  who  favor  this  plan,  be  prepared  to  defend  it  before  a 
constituency  composed  of  people  who  are  not  making  5  per  cent,  on  an  average 
on  the  money  invested  in  farms  or  enterprises,  and  let  those  who  will  profit  by 
the  law  cease  to  deny  the  ability  of  Government  to  increase  the  price  of  prop- 


UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL.  89 

erty  by  law.  One  is  almost  moved  to  tears  by  the  sight  of  New  England  manu- 
facturers protesting  with  indignation  against  the  wisdom  or  possibility  of  giv- 
ing fictitious  value  to  a  product,  when  for  the  last  thirty  years  they  have  drained 
the  rest  of  the  country  and  secured  artificial  prices  by  protective  tariflf  laws. 
Some  of  our  eastern  friends  accuse  the  advocates  of  free  coinage  of  favoring 
repudiation. 

Repudiation  has  not  been  practiced  much  in  recent  years  by  the  debtor,  but 
in  1869  the  Credit  Strengthening  Act  enabled  the  bondholder  to  repudiate  a 
contract  made  with  the  Government  and  to  demand  coin  in  payment  of  a  bond 
for  which  he  had  given  paper  and  which  was  payable  in  lawful  money.  That 
act  increasing  the  market  value  of  the  bonds  gave  a  profit  to  many  who  nov.- 
join  the  beneficiaries  of  the  act  assuming  the  District  debt  in  vociferous  procla- 
mation that  "the  Government  cannot  create  value."  Does  not  the  location  of 
a  public  building  add  to  the  value  of  adjacent  real  estate?  Do  not  towns  contest 
the  location  of  a  county  seat  because  of  the  advantage  it  brings?  Does  not  the 
use  of  gold  and  silver  as  money  increase  the  value  of  each  ounce  of  each  metal? 

These  are  called  precious  metals  because  the  production  is  limited  and  can- 
not be  increased  indefinitely  at  will.  If  this  Government  or  a  number  of  gov- 
ernments can  offer  a  market  unlimited  as  compared  with  the  supply,  the  bullion 
value  of  gold  and  silver  can  be  maintained  at  the  legal  ratio.  The  moment 
one  metal  tends  to  cheapen,  the  use  falls  on  it  and  increases  its  price,  while 
the  decreased  demand  for  the  dearer  metal  retards  its  rise  and  thus  the  bullion 
values  are  kept  near  to  their  legal  ratio,  so  near  that  the  variation  can  cause 
far  less  inconvenience  and  injustice  than  the  variation  in  the  exchangeable 
value  of  the  unit  would  inflict  under  a  single  standard.  The  option  is  always 
given  to  the  debtor  in  a  double  standard. 

In  fact,  the  system  could  not  exist  if  the  option  remained  with  the  creditor, 
for  he  would  demand  the  dearer  metal  and  thus  increase  any  fluctuation  in 
bullion  values,  while  the  option  in  the  hands  of  the  debtor  reduces  the  fluctua- 
tion to  the  minimum.  That  the  unit  under  a  double  standard  is  more  stable 
in  its  relation  to  all  other  things  is  admitted  by  Jevons  and  proven  by  several 
illustrations.  Mr.  GifYen  tries  to  avoid  the  force  of  the  admission  by  saying 
that  the  difference  in  favor  of  the  double  standard  is  only  in  the  proportion  of 
2  to  I,  and  therefore  not  sufficient  to  justify  its  adoption.  It  would  seem  that 
where  stability  is  so  important — and  it  never  was  so  important  as  today,  when 
so  many  long-time  contracts  are  executed — even  a  slight  difference  in  favor  of 
the  double  standard  ought  to  make  it  acceptable. 

We  established  a  bimetallic  standard  in  1792,  but  silver,  being  overvalued 
by  our  ratio  of  15  to  i,  stayed  with  us  and  gold  went  abroad,  where  mint  ratios 
were  more  favorable. 

I  have  here  a  silver  coin  [exhibiting  it]  which  came  from  the  mint  in  1795. 
It  has  upon  the  edge  these  significant  words:  "Hundred  Cents — One  Dollar 
or  Unit."  It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  weight  of  the  gold  dollar  was  reg- 
ulated by  the  silver  dollar,  and  the  gold  pieces  provided  for  made  multiples  of 
it.  In  i8j4  and  in  1837  the  alloy  was  changed  and  the  gold  dollar  reduced  in 
size  in  order  to  correspond  to  the  newly  established  ratio  of  16  to  i.  The 
amount  of  pure  silver  in  the  standard  dollar  has  never  been  changed  since  its 
adoption  in  1792. 


90  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

The  ratio  of  i6  to  i  overvalued  gold  and  our  silver  went  abroad.  The  silver 
dollar  was  worth  about  3  cents  more  than  the  gold  dollar,  because  it  could  be 
coined  in  France  at  the  ratio  of  15^  to  i.  Thus  during  all  tlie  period  prior  to 
1873  this  country  enjoyed  bimetallism  and,  although  at  one  time  we  used  one 
metal  and  at  another  time  another,  no  statesman  arose  to  demand  a  single 
standard.  We  now  have  three  kinds  of  bimetallists — those  who  favor  a  double 
standard  only  by  international  agreement,  those  who  favor  independent  action 
at  a  changed  ratio,  and  those  who  favor  independent  action  at  the  present  ratio. 
Those  favoring  an  international  agreement  might  be  again  divided  into  those 
who  favor  an  agreement  by  a  few  nations,  those  who  favor  an  agreement  by 
many  nations,  and  those  who  favor  it  only  on  condition  that  all  nations  would 
join. 

I  suppose  it  would  hardly  be  proper  to  further  divide  them  into  those  >\'ho 
really  desire  an  international  agreement  and  those  who  utilize  the  possibility  of 
an  international  agreement  to  prevent  independent  action.  I  am  afraid  the 
agreement  will  not  be  brought  about  by  those  who,  like  the  gentleman  from 
Ohio  (Mr.  Harter),  are  willing  to  try  it,  but  have  no  faith  in  its  permanency; 
nor  will  it  receive  much  aid,  I  fear,  from  the  gentleman  from  New  York  (Mr. 
Hendrix),  who  said  on  last  Saturday: 

I  predict  to  you  that  inside  of  three  months— before  this  Congress  meets  again— 
If  you  repeal  this  Sherman  law  and  adjourn,  England  will  make  proposals  to  this 
country  to  come  into  a  monetary  conference  and  see  what  can  be  done  for  the  sake  of  her 
ward,  India. 

Less  than  five  minutes  before  he  had  pierced  the  veil  of  the  future  with 
prophetic  ken  and  declared: 

The  moving  finger  of  Time,  down  from  the  days  when  gold  started  in  the  race  for 
first  place  to  this  moment,  has  pointed  to  a  single  unit  of  value.  It  is  our  destiny.  It  will 
triumph  in  this  Hall — perhaps  not  In  this  Congress  nor  in  your  day;  but  it  is  going  to 
become  the  financial  policy  of  this  country  just  as  sure  as  tomorrow  morning's  sun  will  rise. 

Any  hope  of  bimetallism  there? 

What  is  the  prospect  for  the  establishment  of  international  bimetallism? 
I  would  be  glad  to  see  the  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  a 
fixed  ratio  among  the  nations,  but  how  is  such  an  agreement  to  be  secured? 
The  gentleman  from  Maryland  (Mr.  Rayner)  says  the  unconditional  repeal  of 
the  Sherman  law  will  bring  England  to  terms.  Is  it  impossible  to  extract 
a  lion's  teeth  v,rithout  putting  your  head  in  his  mouth?  Is  it  not  a  dangerous  ex- 
periment to  join  England  in  a  single  standard  in  order  to  induce  her  to 
join  us  in  a  double  standard?  International  agreement  is  an  old  delusion  and 
has  done  important  duty  on  many  previous  occasions. 

The  opponents  of  the  Bland  law  in  1878  were  waiting  for  international 
bimetallism.  Mr.  Cleveland  mentioned  the  prospect  of  it  in  his  message  in 
1885,  and  again  this  year.  It  was  a  valuable  weapon  in  1890,  when  the  Sherman 
bill  was  passed  and  the  Brussels  conference  was  called  in  time  to  carry  us  over 
the  last  Presidential  election.  We  are  still  waiting,  and  those  are  waiting 
most  patiently  who  favor  a  gold  standard.  Are  we  any  nearer  to  an  interna- 
tional agreement  than  we  were  fifteen  years  ago?  The  European  nations  wait  on 
England,  and  she  refused  within  a  year  to  even  consider  the  adoption  of  the 
double  standard.  Can  we  conquer  her  by  waiting?  We  have  tried  the 
Fabian  policy. 


MARIAH  ELIZABETH  BRYAN. 


UNCONDITIONAL   REPEAL.  93 

Suppose  we  try  bringing  her  to  terms  by  action.  Let  me  appeal  to  your 
patriotism.  Shall  we  make  our  laws  dependent  upon  England's  action  and  thus 
allow  her  to  legislate  for  us  upon  the  most  important  of  all  questions?  Shall 
we  confess  our  inability  to  enact  monetary  laws?  Are  we  an  English  colony 
or  an  independent  people?  If  the  use  of  gold  alone  is  to  make  us  slaves,  let  us 
use  both  metals  and  be  free.  If  there  be  some  living  along  the  eastern  coast — 
better  acquainted  with  the  beauties  of  the  Alps  than  with  the  grandeur  of  the 
Rockies,  more  accustomed  to  the  sunny  skies  of  Italy  than  to  the  invigorating 
breezes  of  the  Mississippi  Valley — who  are  not  willing  to  trust  their  fortunes 
and  their  destinies  to  American  citizens,  let  them  learn  that  the  people  living 
between  the  AUeghanies  to  the  Golden  Gate  are  not  afraid  to  cast  their  all  upon 
the  Republic  and  rise  or  fall  with  it. 

One  hundred  and  seventeen  years  ago  the  liberty  bell  gave  notice  to  a  wait- 
ing and  expectant  people  that  independence  had  been  declared.  There  may  be 
doubting,  trembling  ones  among  us  now,  but,  sirs,  I  do  not  overestimate  it  when 
I  say  that  out  of  twelve  millions  of  voters,  more  than  ten  millions  are  waiting, 
anxiously  waiting,  for  the  signal  which  shall  announce  the  financial  independ- 
ence of  the  United  States.  This  Congress  cannot  more  surely  win  the  ap- 
proval of  a  grateful  people  than  by  declaring  that  this  nation,  the  grandest  which 
the  world  has  ever  seen,  has  the  right  and  the  ability  to  legislate  for  its 
own  people  on  every  subject,  regardless  of  the  wishes,  the  entreaties,  or  the 
threats  of  foreign  powers. 

Perhaps  the  most  important  question  for  us  to  consider  is  the  question 
of  ratio.  Comparatively  few  people  in  this  country  are  in  favor  of  a  gold 
standard,  and  no  national  party  has  ever  advocated  it.  Comparatively  few,  also, 
will  be  deceived  by  the  promise  of  international  bimetallism  annually  held  out  to 
us.  Among  those  in  favor  of  bimetallism,  and  in  favor  of  independent  action  on 
the  part  of  the  United  States,  there  is,  however,  an  honest  difference  of  opinion 
as  to  the  particular  ratio  at  which  the  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver 
should  be  undertaken.  The  principle  of  bimetallism  does  not  stand  upon  any 
certain  ratio,  and  may  exist  at  i  to  30  as  well  as  at  i  to  16. 

In  fixing  the  ratio  we  should  select  that  one  which  will  secure  the 
greatest  advantage  to  the  public  and  cause  the  least  injustice.  The  present 
ratio,  in  my  judgment,  should  be  adopted.  A  change  in  the  ratio  could  be 
made  (as  in  1834)  by  reducing  the  size  of  the  gold  dollar  or  by  increasing 
the  size  of  the  silver  dollar,  or  by  making  a  change,  in  the  weight  of  both 
dollars.  A  large  silver  dollar  would  help  the  creditor.  A  smaller  gold  dollar 
would  help  the  debtor.  It  is  not  just  to  do  either,  but  if  a  change  must  be  made 
the  benefit  should  be  given  to  the  debtor  rather  than  to  the  creditor. 

Let  no  one  accuse  me  of  defending  the  justness  of  any  change;  but  I 
repeat  it,  if  we  are  given  a  choice  between  a  change  which  will  aid  the  debtor 
by  reducing  the  size  of  his  debt  and  a  change  which  will  aid  the  creditor  by 
increasing  the  amount  which  he  is  to  receive,  either  by  increasing  the  number 
of  his  dollars  or  their  size,  the  advantage  must  be  given  to  the  debtor,  and  no 
man  during  this  debate,  whatever  may  be  his  private  wish  or  interest,  will  ad- 
vocate the  giving  of  the  advantage  to  the  creditor. 

To  illustrate  the  effect  of  changing  the  ratio  let  us  take,  for  convenience,  the 
ratio  of  24  to  i,  as  advocated  by  some.     We  could  make  this  change  by  reducing 


94  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

the  weight  of  the  gold  dollar  one-third.  This  would  give  to  the  holders  of 
gold  an  advantage  of  some  $200,000,000,  but  the  creditors  would  lose  several 
billions  of  dollars  in  the  actual  value  of  their  debts.  A  debt  contracted  before 
1873  would  not  be  scaled,  because  the  new  gold  dollar  would  purchase  as  much 
as  the  old  gold  dollar  would  in  1873.  Creditors,  however,  whose  loans  have 
been  made  since  that  time  would  suffer,  and  the  most  recent  loans  would  show 
the  greatest  loss.  The  value  of  silver  bullion  has  only  fallen  in  relation  to 
gold.  But  the  purchasing  power  of  one  ounce  of  silver  has  varied  less  since 
1873  than  has  the  purchasing  power  of  one  ounce  of  gold,  which  would  in- 
dicate that  gold  had  risen. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  ratio  is  changed  by  increasing  the  size  of  the 
silver  dollar,  it  would  be  necessary  to  recoin  our  silver  dollars  into  dollars 
a  half  larger,  or  we  would  have  in  circulation  two  legal  tender  silver  dollars  of 
different  sizes.  Of  the  two  plans  it  would  be  better,  in  my  judgment,  to  keep 
both  dollars  in  circulation  together,  though  unequal  in  weight,  rather  than  to 
recoin  the  lighter  dollars.  The  recoinage  of  more  than  500,000,000  of  silver 
dollars,  or  the  bullion  representing  them,  would  cause  a  shrinkage  of  about 
$170,000,000,  or  one-third  of  our  silver  money;  it  would  cause  a  shrinkage  of 
nearly  one-sixth  of  our  metallic  money  and  of  more  than  one-tenth  of  our 
total  circulation.  This  contraction  would  increase  our  debts  more  than  a  billion 
dollars  and  decrease  the  nominal  value  of  our  property  more  than  five  billions. 

A  change  in  the  ratio  made  by  increasing  the  size  of  the  silver  dollar  as 
above  suggested  would  also  decrease  by  one-third  the  number  of  dollars 
which  could  be  coined  from  the  annual  product  of  silver.  If,  as  Mr.  Carlisle  has 
said,  the  supply  of  metal,  both  gold  and  silver,  is  none  too  large  to  keep 
pace  with  population,  the  increase  in  the  weight  of  each  dollar  would  make  the 
supply  to  that  extent  deficient.  A  change  in  ratio,  whether  secured  by  decreas- 
ing the  gold  dollar  or  by  increasing  the  silver  dollar,  would  probably  make 
an  international  agreement  more  difficult,  because  nearly  all  of  the  silver  coin 
now  in  existence  circulates  at  a  ratio  less  than  ours. 

If  the  change  should  be  made  in  this  country  by  increasing  the  size  of  the 
silver  dollar  and  an  international  agreement  secured  upon  the  new  ratio,  to  be 
effected  by  other  nations  in  the  same  way,  the  amount  of  money  in  the  world, 
that  is  metallic  money,  would  suffer  a  contraction  of  more  than  $1,000,000,000, 
to  the  enormous  injury  of  the  debtor  class  and  to  the  enormous  advantage  of  the 
creditor  class.  If  we  believe  that  the  value  of  gold  has  risen  because  its  supply 
has  not  increased  as  fast  as  the  demand  caused  by  favorable  legislation,  then  it 
would  be  unfair  to  continue  this  appreciation  by  other  legislation  favorable  to 
gold.  It  would  be  a  special  injustice  to  the  mine  owner  and  to  the  farmer, 
whose  products  have  fallen  with  silver,  to  make  perpetual  the  injunction  against 
their  prosperity. 

We  often  hear  our  opponents  complain  of  the  "cupidity  of  the  mine  owner." 
Let  us  admit  that  the  mine  owner  is  selfish,  and  that  he  will  profit  by  the  in- 
creased price  of  silver  bullion.  Let  us,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  go  further,  and 
accuse  him  of  favoring  the  free  coinage  of  silver  solely  for  the  purpose  of  in- 
creasing the  price  of  his  product.  Does  that  make  him  worse  than  other  men? 
Is  not  the  farmer  selfish  enough  to  desire  a  higher  price  for  wheat?  Is  not  the 
cotton-grower  selfish  enough  to  desire  a  higher  price  for  his  cotton?      Is  not 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL  95 

the  laboring  man  selfish  enough  to  desire  higher  wages?  And,  if  I  may  be 
pardoned  for  the  boldness,  are  not  bankers  and  business  men  selfish  enough 
to  ask  for  legislation  at  our  hands  which  will  give  them  prosperity?  Was  not 
this  extraordinary  session  called  in  order  to  bring  back  prosperity  to  our  busi- 
ness men? 

Is  it  any  more  important  that  you  should  keep  a  mercantile  house  from 
failing  than  that  you  should  keep  a  mine  from  suspending?  Are  those  who 
desire  free  coinage  of  silver  in  order  that  the  barren  wastes  should  be  made  to 
"blossom  like  the  rose"  any  worse  than  those  who  want  the  Sherman  law  re- 
pealed in  order  to  borrow  foreign  gold  and  retire  clearing  house  certificates? 
There  is  a  class  of  people  whose  interest  in  financial  legislation  is  too  often 
overlooked.  The  money-loaner  has  just  as  much  interest  in  the  rise  in  the 
value  of  his  product — money — as  farmers  and  miners  have  in  the  increased  price 
of  their  products. 

The  man  who  has  $10,000  in  money  becomes  worth  $20,000  in  reality  when 
prices  fall  one-half.  Shall  we  assume  that  the  money-lenders  of  this  and  other 
countries  ignore  the  advantage  which  an  appreciated  currency  gives  to  them 
and  desire  it  simply  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor  man  and  the  laborer?  What 
refining  influence  is  there  in  their  business  which  purges  away  the  dross  of 
selfishness  and  makes  pure  and  patriotic  only  their  motives?  Has  some  new 
dispensation  reversed  the  parable  and  left  Lazarus  in  torment  while  Dives  is 
borne  aloft  in  Abraham's  bosom? 

But  is  the  silver  miner  after  all  so  selfish  as  to  be  worthy  of  censure?  Does 
he  ask  for  some  new  legislation  or  for  some  innovation  inaugurated  in  his 
behalf?  No.  He  pleads  only  for  the  restoration  of  the  money  of  the  fathers. 
He  asks  to  have  given  back  to  him  a  right  which  he  enjoyed  from  1792  to  1873. 
During  all  those  years  he  could  deposit  his  silver  bullion  at  the  mints  and  re- 
ceive full  legal  tender  coins  at  the  rate  of  $1.29  for  each  ounce  of  silver,  and 
during  a  part  of  the  time  his  product  could  be  converted  into  money  at  even  a 
higher  price.  Free  coinage  can  only  give  back  to  him  what  demonetization 
took  away.  He  does  not  ask  for  a  silver  dollar  redeemable  in  a  gold  dollar,  but 
for  a  silver  dollar  which  redeems  itself. 

If  the  bullion  value  of  silver  has  not  been  reduced  by  hostile  legislation, 
the  free  coinage  of  silver  at  the  present  ratio  can  bring  to  the  mine  owner  no 
benefit,  except  by  enabling  him  to  pay  a  debt  already  contracted  with  less 
ounces  of  silver.  If  the  price  of  his  product  has  been  reduced  by  hostile  legis- 
lation, is  he  asking  any  more  than  we  would  ask  under  the  same  circum- 
stances in  seeking  to  remove  the  oppressive  hand  of  the  law?  Let  me  suggest, 
too,  that  those  who  favor  an  international  agreement  are  estopped  from  ob- 
jecting to  the  profits  of  the  silver  mine  owner,  because  an  international  agree- 
ment could  only  be  effected  at  some  ratio  near  to  ours,  probably  ISJ4 
to  I,  and  this  would  just  as  surely  inure  to  the  benefit  of  the  owner  of  silver  as 
would  free  coinage  established  by  the  independent  action  of  this  country. 

If  our  opponents  were  correct  in  asserting  that  the  price  of  silver  bullion 
could  be  maintained  at  129  cents  an  ounce  by  international  agreement,  but  not 
by  our  separate  action,  then  international  bimetallism  would  bring  a  larger 
profit  to  the  mine  owner  than  the  free  coinage  of  silver  by  this  country  could. 
Let  the  international  bimetallist.  then,  find  some  better  objection  to  free 
coinage  than  that  based  on  the  mine  owner's  profit 


96  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

But  what  is  the  mine  owner's  profit?  Has  anyone  told  you  the  average 
cost  of  mining  an  ounce  of  silver?  You  have  heard  of  some  particular  mine 
where  silver  can  be  produced  at  a  low  cost,  but  no  one  has  attempted  to  give 
you  any  reliable  data  as  to  the  average  cost  of  production.  I  had  a  letter  from 
Mr.  Leech  when  he  was  Director  of  the  Mint,  saying  that  the  Government  is  in 
possession  of  no  data  in  regard  to  the  cost  of  gold  production  and  none  of  any 
value  in  regard  to  silver.  No  calculation  can  be  made  as  to  the  profits  of 
mining  which  does  not  include  money  spent  in  prospecting  and  in  mines  which 
have  ceased  to  pay,  as  well  as  those  which  are  profitably  worked. 

When  we  see  a  wheel  of  fortune  with  twenty-four  paddles,  see  those 
paddles  sold  for  lo  cents  apiece,  and  see  the  holder  of  the  winning  paddle  draw 
$2,  we  do  not  conclude  that  money  can  be  profitably  invested  in  a  wheel  of  for- 
tune. We  know  that  those  who  bought  expended  altogether  $2.40  on  the  turn 
of  the  wheel,  and  that  the  man  who  won  only  received  $2;  but  our  opponents 
insist  upon  estimating  the  profits  of  silver  mining  by  the  cost  of  the  winning 
paddle.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  taking  the  gold  and  silver  of  the  world — and  it  is 
more  true  of  silver  than  of  gold — every  dollar's  worth  of  metal  has  cost  a  dollar. 
It  is  strange  that  those  who  watch  so  carefully  lest  the  silver  miner  shall  receive 
more  for  his  product  than  the  bare  cost  of  production  ignore  the  more  fortunate 
gold  miner. 

Did  you  ever  hear  a  monometallist  complain  because  a  man  could  produce 
25.8  grains  of  gold,  9  fine,  at  any  price  whatever,  and  yet  take  it  to  our  mint  and 
have  it  stamped  into  a  dollar  with  full  legal  tender  qualities?  I  saw  at  the 
World's  Fair  a  few  days  ago  a  nugget  of  gold,  just  as  it  was  found,  worth  over 
$3,000.  What  an  outrage  that  the  finder  should  be  allowed  to  convert  that  into 
money  at  such  an  enormous  profit!  And  yet  no  advocate  of  honest  money 
raises  his  hand  to  stop  that  crime. 

The  fact  is  that  the  price  of  gold  and  silver  does  not  depend  upon  the  cost 
of  production,  but  upon  the  law  of  supply  and  demand.  It  is  true  that  pro- 
duction will  stop  when  either  metal  cannot  be  produced  at  a  profit;  but  so 
long  as  the  demand  continues  equal  to  the  supply  the  value  of  an  ounce  of 
either  metal  may  be  far  above  the  cost  of  production.  With  most  kinds  of 
property  a  rise  in  price  will  cause  increased  production;  for  instance,  if  the  price 
of  wheat  rises  faster  than  the  price  of  other  things,  there  will  be  a  tendency  to 
increased  production  until  the  price  falls;  but  this  tendency  cannot  be  carried 
out  in  the  case  of  the  precious  metals,  because  the  metals  must  be  found  before 
it  can  be  produced,  and  finding  is  uncertain. 

Between  1800  and  1849  an  ounce  of  gold  or  silver  would  exchange  for  more 
of  other  things  than  it  would  from  1849  to  1873,  yet  during  the  latter  period  the 
production  of  both  gold  and  silver  greatly  increased.  It  will  be  said  that  the 
purchasing  power  of  an  ounce  of  metal  fell  because  of  the  increased  supply;  but 
that  fall  did  not  check  production,  nor  has  the  rise  in  the  purchasing  power  of 
an  ounce  of  gold  since  1873  increased  the  production.  The  production  of  both 
gold  and  silver  is  controlled  so  largely  by  chance  as  to  make  some  of  the  laws 
applicable  to  other  property  inapplicable  to  the  precious  metals.  If  the  supply 
of  gold  decreases  without  any  diminution  of  the  demand  the  exchangeable  value 
of  each  ounce  of  gold  is  bound  to  increase,  although  the  cost  of  producing  the 
gold  may  continue  to  fall. 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  97 

Why  do  not  the  advocates  of  gold  monometallism  recognize  and  complain 
of  the  advantage  given  to  gold  by  laws  which  increase  the  demand  for  it  and, 
therefore,  the  value  of  each  ounce?  Instead  of  that  they  confine  themselves  to 
the  denunciation  of  the  silver-mine  owner.  I  have  never  advocated  the  use  of 
either  gold  or  silver  as  the  means  of  giving  employment  to  miners,  nor  has 
the  defence  of  bimetallism  been  conducted  by  those  interested  in  the  production 
of  silver.  We  favor  the  use  of  gold  and  silver  as  money  because  money  is  a 
necessity  and  because  these  metals,  owing  to  special  fitness,  have  been  used  from 
time  immemorial.  The  entire  annual  supply  of  both  metals,  coined  at  the 
present  ratio,  does  not  afford  too  large  a  sum  of  money. 

If,  as  is  estimated,  two-thirds  of  the  $130,000,000  of  gold  produced  annually 
are  consumed  in  the  arts,  only  $46,000,000 — or  less  than  we  need  for  this  country 
alone — are  left  to  coinage.  If  one-sixth  of  the  $185,000,000  of  silver  produced 
annually  is  used  in  the  arts,  $155,000,000  are  left  for  coinage.  India  has  been  in 
the  habit  of  taking  about  one-third  of  that  sum.  Thus  the  total  amount  of  gold 
and  silver  annually  available  for  all  the  people  of  all  the  world  is  only  about 
$200,000,000,  or  about  four  times  what  we  need  in  this  country  to  keep  pace 
with  increasing  population.  And  as  population  increases  the  annual  addition 
to  the  money  must  also  increase. 

The  total  sum  of  metallic  money  is  a  little  less  than  $8,000,000,000.  The 
$200,000,000  per  annum  is  about  two-and-a-half  per  cent,  on  the  total  volume  of 
metallic  money,  taking  no  account  of  lost  coins  and  shrinkage  by  abrasion. 
To  quote  again  the  language  of  Mr.  Carlisle. 

Mankind  will  be  fortunate  indeed  if  the  annual  production  of  gold  coin  shall  keep 
pace  with  the  annual  increase  of  population,  commerce  and  Industry. 

An  increase  of  the  silver  dollar  one-third  by  an  international  agreement 
would  reduce  by  50,000,000  the  number  of  dollars  which  could  be  coined  from 
the  annual  product  of  silver,  which  would  amount  to  a  decrease  of  about  one- 
fourth  of  the  entire  increase  of  metallic  money,  while  the  abandonment  of  silver 
entirely  would  destroy  three-quarters  of  the  annual  increase  in  metallic  money, 
or  possibly  all  of  it,  if  we  take  into  consideration  the  reduction  of  the  gold 
supply  by  the  closing  of  gold-producing  silver  mines. 

Thus  it  is  almost  certain  that  without  silver  the  sum  of  metallic  money 
would  remain  stationary,  if  not  actually  decrease,  from  year  to  year,  while  pop- 
ulation increases  and  new  enterprises  demand,  from  time  to  time,  a  larger  sum 
of  currency.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  the  money  question  is  broader  than  the 
interest  of  a  few  mine  owners.  It  touches  every  man,  woman,  and  child  in  all 
the  world,  and  affects  those  in  every  condition  of  life  and  society. 

The  interest  of  the  mine  owner  is  incidental.  He  profits  by  the  use  of  silver 
as  money  just  as  the  gold  miner  profits  by  the  use  of  gold  as  money;  just  as 
the  newspaper  profits  by  the  law  compelling  the  advertising  of  foreclosures; 
just  as  the  seaport  profits  by  the  deepening  of  its  harbor;  just  as  the  horse 
seller  would  profit  by  a  war  which  required  the  purchase  of  a  large  number  of 
horses  for  cavalry  service,  or  just  as  the  undertaker  would  profit  by  the  decent 
burial  of  a  pauper  at  public  expense. 

All  of  these  receive  an  incidental  benefit  from  public  acts.  Shall  we  com- 
plain if  the  use  of  gold  and  silver  as  money  gives  employment  to  men,  builds 
up  cities  and  fills  our  mountains  with  life  and  industry?    Shall  we  oppress  all 


98  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

debtors  and  derange  all  business  agreements  in  order  to  prevent  the  producers 
of  money  metals  from  obtaining  for  them  more  than  actual  cost?  We  do  not 
reason  that  way  in  other  things;  why  suppress  the  reason  in  this  matter  because 
of  cultivated  prejudices  against  the  white  metal?  But  what  interest  has  the 
farmer  in  this  subject,  you  may  ask.  The  same  that  every  laboring  man  has  in 
a  currency  sufficient  to  carry  on  the  commerce  and  business  of  a  country.  The 
employer  cannot  give  work  to  men  unless  he  can  carry  on  the  business  at  a 
profit,  and  he  is  hampered  and  embarrassed  by  a  currency  which  appreciates 
because  of  its  insufficiency. 

The  farmer  labors  under  a  double  disadvantage.  He  not  only  suffers  as 
a  producer  from  all  those  causes  which  reduce  the  price  of  property,  but  he  is 
thrown  into  competition  with  the  products  of  India.  Without  Indian  competi- 
tion his  lot  would  be  hard  enough,  for  if  he  is  a  land  owner  he  finds  his 
capital  decreasing  with  an  appreciating  standard,  and  if  he  owes  on  the  land 
he  finds  his  equity  of  redemption  extinguished.  The  last  census  shows  a  real 
estate  mortgage  indebtedness  in  the  five  great  agricultural  States — Illinois,  Iowa, 
Missouri,  Kansas  and  Nebraska — of  more  than  one  billion  of  dollars.  A  rising 
standard  means  a  great  deal  of  distress  to  these  mortgagors.  But  as  I  said,  the 
producers  of  wheat  and  cotton  have  a  special  grievance,  for  the  prices  of  those 
articles  are  governed  largely  by  the  prices  in  Liverpool,  and  as  silver  goes 
down  our  prices  fall,  while  the  rupee  price  remains  the  same.  I  quote  from 
the  agricultural  report  of  1890,  page  8: 

The  recent  legislation  looking  to  the  restoration  of  the  bimetallic  standard  of  our 
currency,  and  the  consequent  enhancement  of  the  value  of  silver,  has  unquestionably 
had  much  to  do  with  the  recent  advance  in  the  price  of  cereals.  The  same  cause  has 
advanced  the  price  of  wheat  in  Russia  and  India,  and  In  the  same  degree  reduced  their 
power  of  competition.  English  gold  was  formerly  exchanged  for  cheap  silver  and  wheat 
purchased  with  the  cheaper  metal  was  sold  in  Great  Britain  for  gold.  Much  of  this 
advantage  Is  lost  by  the  appreciation  of  silver  in  those  countries.  It  Is  reasonable, 
therefore,  to  expect  much  higher  prices  for  wheat  than  have  been  received  in  recent  years. 

Mr.  Rusk's  reasoning  is  correct.  Shall  we  by  changing  the  ratio  fix  the 
price  of  wheat  and  cotton  at  the  present  low  price?  If  it  is  possible  to  do  so  it 
is  no  more  than  fair  that  we  restore  silver  to  its  former  place,  and  thus  give 
back  to  the  farmer  some  of  his  lost  prosperity.  Can  silver  be  maintained  on  a 
parity  with  gold  at  the  present  ratio?  It  has  been  shown  that  if  we  should 
fail  and  our  effort  should  result  in  a  single  silver  standard  it  would  be  better 
for  us  than  the  adoption  of  the  gold  standard — that  is,  that  the  worst  that 
could  come  from  the  attempt  would  be  far  better  than  the  best  that  our  oppo- 
nents could  offer  us. 

It  has  been  shown  that  dangers  and  disadvantages  attend  a  change  of  ratio. 
It  may  now  be  added  that  no  change  in  the  ratio  can  be  made  with  fairness 
or  intelligence  without  first  putting  gold  and  silver  upon  a  perfect  equality 
in  order  to  tell  what  the  natural  ratio  is.  If  a  new  ratio  is  necessary,  who 
can  tell  just  what  that  ratio  ought  to  be?  Who  knows  to  what  extent  the 
divergence  between  gold  and  silver  is  due  to  natural  laws  and  to  what  extent 
it  is  due  to  artificial  laws?  We  know  that  the  mere  act  of  India  in  suspending 
free  coinage,  although  she  continues  to  buy  and  coin  on  government  account, 
reduced  the  price  of  silver  more  than  10  cents  per  ounce.  Can  anyone  doubt 
that  the  restoration  of  free  coinage  in  that  country  would  increase  the  bullion 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  99 

price  of  silver?  Who  doubts  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  by  the  United  States 
would  increase  its  bullion  price? 

The  only  question  is  how  much.  Is  it  only  a  guess,  for  no  one  can  state 
with  mathematical  precision  what  the  rise  would  be.  The  full  use  of  silver, 
too,  would  stop  the  increased  demand  for  gold,  and  thus  prevent  any  further 
rise  in  its  price.  It  is  because  no  one  can  speak  with  certainty  that  I  insist  that 
no  change  in  the  ratio  can  be  intelligently  made  until  both  metals  are  offered 
equal  privileges  at  the  mint.  When  we  have  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of 
gold  and  silver  at  the  present  ratio,  then,  and  then  only,  can  we  tell  whether 
any  of  the  apparent  fall  in  the  bullion  price  of  silver  is  due  to  circumstances 
over  which  we  have  no  control,  if  so,  how  much?  If  this  experiment  should 
demonstrate  the  necessity  for  a  change  of  ratio  it  can  be  easily  made,  and  should 
be  made  in  such  a  way  as  to  cause  the  least  injury  to  society.  But  we  can,  in  my 
judgment,  maintain  the  parity  at  the  present  ratio.  I  state  this  without  hesita- 
tion, notwithstanding  the  fact  that  our  opponents  do  not  disguise  the  contempt 
which  they  feel  for  one  who  can  believe  this  possible.  If  the  past  teaches  any- 
thing it  teaches  the  possibility  of  this  country  maintaining  the  parity  alone. 
The  Royal  Commission  of  England  stated  in  its  report  that  France  did  main- 
tain the  parity  at  15^/^  to  i,  although  she  has  not  half  our  population  or  en- 
terprise. During  the  years  when  her  mint  laws  controlled  the  price  of  gold 
and  silver  bullion  the  changes  in  the  relative  production  of  gold  and  silver  were 
greater  than  they  have  been  since.  At  one  time  before  1873  the  value  of  the 
silver  product  was  related  to  the  value  of  the  gold  product  as  3  to  i,  while  at 
another  time  the  relation  was  reversed,  and  the  production  of  gold  to  silver 
was  as  3  to  i. 

No  such  changes  have  occurred  since;  and  the  present  value  of  the  silver 
product  is  only  i^  to  i  of  gold.  Much  of  the  prejudice  against  silver  is  due 
to  the  fact  that  it  has  been  falling  as  compared  to  gold.  Let  it  begin  to  rise 
and  it  will  become  more  acceptable  as  a  money  metal.  Goschen,  at  the  Paris 
Conference,  very  aptly  stated  the  condition  when  he  said: 

At  present  there  Is  a  vicious  circle.  States  are  afraid  of  employing  silver  on  account 
of  the  depreciation,  and  the  depreciation  continues  because  States  refuse  to  employ  it. 

Let  that  "vicious  circle"  be  broken  and  silver  will  resume  its  rightful 
place.  We  believe,  in  other  words,  that  the  opening  of  our  mints  to  the  free 
and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  16  to  i  would  immediately  result  in 
restoring  silver  to  the  coinage  value  of  $1.29  per  ounce,  not  only  here,  but  every- 
where. That  there  could  be  no  difference  between  the  dollar  coined  and  the 
same  weight  of  silver  uncoined,  when  one  could  be  exchanged  for  the  other, 
needs  no  argument. 

We  do  not  believe  that  the  gold  dollar  would  go  to  a  premium,  because  it 
could  not  find  a  better  coinage  ratio  elsewhere,  and  because  it  could  be  put 
to  no  purpose  for  which  a  silver  dollar  would  not  be  as  good.  If  our  ratio 
were  i  to  14  our  gold  would  of  course  be  exchanged  for  silver;  but  with  our 
ratio  of  16  to  i  gold  is  worth  more  here  than  abroad,  and  foreign  silver  would 
not  come  here,  because  it  is  circulating  at  home  at  a  better  ratio  than  we  offer. 

We  need  not  concern  ourselves,  therefore,  about  the  coin  silver.  All  that 
we  have  to  take  care  of  is  the  annual  product  from  the  mines,  about  40  per  cent 
of  which  is  produced  in  this  country.     Under  the  Sherman  law  we  furnish  a  mar- 


100  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL 

ket  for  about  one-third  of  the  world's  annual  product.  I  believe  about  one- 
sixth  is  used  in  the  arts,  which  would  leave  about  one-half  for  all  the  rest  of 
the  world.  India  has  suspended  free  coinage  temporarily,  in  anticipation  of  the 
repeal  of  the  Sherman  law.  The  Herschell  report  expressly  states  that  the 
action  was  necessary,  because  no  agreement  with  the  United  States  could  be 
secured.    The  language  is  as  follows: 

In  a  dispatch  of  the  30th  of  June,  1892,  the  government  of  India  expressed  the 
deliberate  opinion  that,  If  It  became  clear  that  the  Brussels  conference  was  unlikely  to 
arrive  at  a  satisfactory  conclusion,  and  If  a  direct  agreement  between  India  and  the 
United  States  were  found  to  be  unattainable,  the  government  of  India  should  at  once 
close  their  mints  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver  and  make  arrangements  for  the  intro- 
duction of  the  gold  standard. 

There  is  no  doubt  of  the  restoration  of  free  coinage  in  India  if  this  Gov- 
ernment takes  the  lead,  and  with  India  taking  the  usual  amount,  but  one-sixth 
of  the  annual  supply  is  left  for  the  other  silver-using  countries.  There  can  be  no 
flood  of  silver,  nor  will  prices  rise  to  any  considerable  extent — except  the  price 
of  silver  itself  and  a  few  of  the  staple  products  of  agriculture  which  have  fallen 
with  silver  because  of  India's  competition.  General  prices  cannot  rise  unless 
the  total  number  of  dollars  increases  more  rapidly  than  the  need  for  dollars, 
which  has  been  shown  to  be  impossible.  The  danger  is,  that  taking  all  the  gold 
and  all  the  silver,  we  will  not  have  enough  money,  and  that  there  will  still 
be  some  appreciation  in  the  standard  of  value. 

To  recapitulate,  then,  there  is  not  enough  of  either  metal  to  form  the  basis 
for  the  world's  metallic  money;  both  metals  must  therefore  be  used  as  full 
legal  tender  primary  money.  There  is  not  enough  of  both  metals  to  more 
than  keep  pace  with  the  increased  demand  for  money;  silver  cannot  be  retained 
in  circulation  as  a  part  of  the  world's  money  if  the  United  States  abandons  it. 
This  nation  must,  therefore,  either  retain  the  present  law  or  make  some  further 
provision  for  silver.  The  only  rational  plan  is  to  use  both  gold  and  silver 
at  some  ratio  with  equal  privileges  at  the  Mint.  No  change  in  the  ratio  can 
be  made  intelligently  until  both  metals  are  put  on  an  equality  at  the  present  ratio. 
The  present  ratio  should  be  adopted  if  the  parity  can  be  maintained;  and, 
lastly,  it  can  be. 

If  these  conclusions  are  correct  what  must  be  our  action  on  the  bill  to  un- 
conditionally repeal  the  Sherman  law?  The  Sherman  law  has  a  serious  defect; 
it  treats  silver  as  a  commodity  rather  than  as  a  money,  and  thus  discriminates 
between  silver  and  gold.  The  Sherman  law  was  passed  in  1890  as  a  substitute 
for  what  was  known  as  the  Bland  law.  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  Bland 
law  was  forced  upon  the  silver  men  as  a  compromise,  and  that  the  opponents 
of  silver  sought  its  repeal  from  the  day  it  was  passed.  It  will  also  be  remem- 
bered that  the  Sherman  law  was  in  like  manner  forced  upon  the  silver  men  as 
a  compromise,  and  that  the  opponents  of  silver  have  sought  its  repeal  ever 
since  it  became  a  law.  The  law  provides  for  the  compulsory  purchase  of 
54,000,000  ounces  of  silver  per  year,  and  for  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  thereon 
at  the  gold  value  of  the  bullion. 

These  notes  are  a  legal  tender  and  are  redeemable  in  gold  or  silver  at  the 
option  of  the  Government.  There  is  also  a  clause  in  the  law  which  states 
that  it  is  the  policy  of  this  Government  to  maintain  the  parity  between  the 
metals.    The  Administration,  it  seems,  has  decided  that  the  parity  can  only  be 


GROUP  OF  MR.  BRYAN. 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  103 

maintained  by  violating  a  part  of  the  law  and  giving  the  option  to  the  holder 
instead  of  to  the  Government.  Without  discussing  the  administration  of  the 
law  let  us  consider  the  charges  made  against  it. 

The  main  objection  which  we  heard  last  spring  was  that  the  Treasury 
notes  were  used  to  draw  gold  out  of  the  Treasury.  If  that  objection  were 
a  material  one  the  bill  might  easily  be  amended  so  as  to  make  the  Treasury 
notes  hereafter  issued  redeemable  only  in  silver,  like  the  silver  certificates 
issued  under  the  Bland  law.  But  the  objection  is  scarcely  important  enough 
for  consideration.  While  the  Treasury  notes  have  been  used  to  draw  out  gold, 
they  need  not  have  been  used  for  that  purpose,  for  we  have  $346,000,000  worth 
of  greenbacks  with  which  gold  can  be  drawn,  so  long  as  the  Government  gives 
the  option  to  the  holder.  If  all  of  the  Treasury  notes  were  destroyed  the  green- 
backs are  sufficient  to  draw  out  the  $100,000,000  reserve  three  times  over,  and 
then  they  can  be  reissued  and  used  again.  To  complain  of  the  Treasury  notes 
while  the  greenbacks  remain  is  like  finding  fault  because  the  gate  is  open  when 
the  whole  fence  is  down,  and  reminds  me  of  the  man  who  made  a  box  for 
his  feline  family,  and  cut  a  big  hole  for  the  cat  to  go  in  at  and  a  little  hole  for 
the  kittens  to  go  in  at,  forgetting  that  the  large  hole  would  do  for  cats 
of  all  sizes. 

Just  at  this  time  the  law  is  being  made  the  scapegoat  upon  which  all  our 
financial  ills  are  loaded,  and  its  immediate  and  unconditional  repeal  is  demanded 
as  the  sole  means  by  which  prosperity  can  be  restored  to  a  troubled  people. 

The  main  accusation  against  it  now  is  that  it  destroys  confidence  and  that 
foreign  money  will  not  come  here,  because  the  holder  is  afraid  that  we  will 
go  to  a  silver  standard.  The  exportation  of  gold  has  been  pointed  to  as 
conclusive  evidence  that  frightened  English  bondholders  were  throwing  Ameri- 
can securities  upon  the  market  and  selling  them  to  our  people  in  exchange  for 
gold.  But  now  gold  is  coming  back  faster  than  it  went  away,  and  still  we  have 
the  Sherman  law  unrepealed.  Since  that  theory  will  not  explain  both  the  export 
and  import  of  gold,  let  us  accept  a  theory  which  will.  The  balance  of  trade  has 
been  largely  against  us  during  the  last  year,  and  gold  went  abroad  to  pay  it, 
but  now  our  exportation  of  breadstufTs  has  increased  and  the  gold  is  returning. 
Its  going  was  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  Austria-Hungary  was  gathering  in 
gold  for  resumption  and  was  compelled  to  take  a  part  from  us.  Instead  of 
using  that  export  of  gold  as  a  reason  for  going  to  a  gold  basis,  it  ought  to  make 
us  realize  the  danger  of  depending  solely  upon  a  metal  which  some  other  na- 
tion may  deprive  us  of  at  a  critical  moment. 

Mr.  Cannon  of  Illinois.     Will  the  gentleman  permit  me  to  interrupt  him? 

Mr.  Bryan.     Certainly. 

Mr.  Cannon  of  Illinois.  I  am  in  complete  harmony  with  what  my  friend 
is  saying  now.  I  ask  him  if  he  will  allow  me  to  request  him  not  to  omit  to 
state  that  in  the  twelve  months  ending  June  30  last  this  same  balance  of  trade 
that  was  against  us  not  only  took  the  gold  of  the  United  States,  but  nearly 
$17,000,000  of  silver  as  well. 

Mr.  Bryan.     I  think  the  statement  made  by  the  gentleman  is  correct. 

The  Sherman  law  fails  utterly  to  account  for  present  stringency.  Let  me 
suggest  a  more  reasonable  cause  for  the  trouble.  Last  spring  an  attempt  was 
made  to  secure  the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law.  We  had  no'panic 
6 


104  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

then,  but  the  same  forces  which  have  always  opposed  any  legislation  favorable 
to  silver  demanded  that  the  purchase  of  bullion  should  stop.  Some  who  believe 
that  15  per  cent,  reserve  makes  a  bank  safe  became  frightened  lest  a  25  or  30  per 
cent,  reserve  might  not  be  sufficient  to  make  the  Government  safe,  and  wanted 
an  issue  of  gold  bonds.  The  great  argument  used  in  favor  of  both  these  propo- 
sitions was  that  money  was  being  drawn  from  the  Treasury  and  sent  to  Europe; 
that  confidence  was  being  destroyed  and  that  a  panic  would  follow.  They  em- 
phasized and  magnified  the  evils  which  would  follow  the  departure  of  gold; 
they  worked  themselves  and  their  associates  into  a  condition  of  fright  which  did 
cause  financial  stringency.  Like  the  man  who  innocently  gives  the  alarm  of 
fire  in  a  crowded  hall,  they  excited  a  panic  which  soon  got  beyond  control. 

The  trouble  now  is  that  depositors  have  withdrawn  their  deposits  from  the 
banks  for  fear  of  loss,  and  the  banks  are  compelled  to  draw  in  their  loans  to 
protect  their  reserves,  and  thus  men  who  do  business  upon  borrowed  capital  are 
crippled.  The  people  have  not  lost  faith  in  the  Government  or  in  the  Govern- 
ment's money.  They  do  not  refuse  silver  or  silver  certificates.  They  are  glad 
enough  to  get  any  kind  of  money.  We  were  told  last  spring  that  gold  was 
going  to  a  premium,  but  recently  in  New  York  City  men  found  a  profitable 
business  in  the  selling  of  silver  certificates  of  small  denominations  at  2  per  cent, 
premium,  and  on  the  5th  of  this  month  there  appeared  in  the  New  York  Herald 
and  the  New  York  Times  this  advertisement: 

WANTED— SILVER  DOLLARS.— We  desire  to  purchase  at  a  premium  of  %  per 
cent.,  or  $7.50  per  thousand,  standard  silver  dollars,  in  sums  of  $1,000  or  more,  ia  return 
for  our  certified  checks  payable  through  the  clearing-house. 

ZIMMERMAN  &  FORSHAY,  Bankers,  11  Wall  Street. 

About  the  same  time  the  New  York  police  force  was  paid  in  $20  gold  pieces 
because  of  the  scarcity  of  other  kinds  of  money.  How  many  of  the  failing 
banks  have  obeyed  the  law  in  regard  to  reserve?  How  many  have  crippled 
themselves  by  loaning  too  much  to  their  officers  and  directors?  The  situation 
can  be  stated  in  a  few  words:  Money  cannot  be  secured  to  carry  on  business 
because  the  banks  have  no  money  to  loan;  banks  have  no  money  to  loan  be- 
cause the  depositors  have  withdrawn  their  money;  depositors  have  withdrawn 
their  money  because  they  fear  the  solvency  of  the  banks;  enterprises  are  stag- 
nant because  money  is  not  in  circulation. 

Will  a  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  cure  these  evils?  Can  you  cure  hunger 
by  a  famine?  I  knov/  that  there  are  some  who  tell  us  that  we  have  plenty  of 
money.  If  I  may  be  pardoned  for  a  personal  allusion,  their  attitude  reminds 
me  of  a  remark  made  by  my  father-in-law  just  after  he  intrusted  his  daughter 
to  my  care.  "William,"  said  he,  laying  his  hand  affectionately  on  my  head, 
"while  I  have  we  shall  not  both  want."  Others  say,  "What  is  the  use  of  having 
more  money?  We  cannot  get  it  unless  we  have  something  to  sell."  That  is 
true;  but  the  price  of  what  we  sell  depends  largely  upon  the  amount  of  money 
in  circulation.  How  can  we  pay  our  debts  without  selling  something,  and 
how  can  we  sell  anything  unless  there  is  money  in  circulation  to  buy  with? 
We  need  money.  The  Sherm.an  law  supplies  a  certain  amount.  Will  the  strin- 
gency be  relieved  by  suspending  that  issue?  If  the  advocates  of  repeal  would 
take  for  their  battle  cry,  "Stop  issuing  money,"  instead  of  "Stop  buying  silver," 
would  not  their  purpose  be  more  plain?  But  they  say  the  repeal  of  the  law 
will  encourage  foreign  capital  to  come  here  by  giving  assurance  that  it  will  be 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  105 

repaid  on  a  gold  basis.  Can  we  afford  to  buy  confidence  at  that  price?  Can 
we  afford  to  abandon  the  constitutional  right  to  pay  in  either  gold  or  silver  in 
order  to  borrow  foreign  gold  with  the  certainty  of  having  to  pay  it  back  in 
appreciated  dollars?  To  my  mind,  Mr.  Speaker,  the  remedy  proposed  seems 
not  only  dangerous  and  absurd,  but  entirely  inadequate.  Why  try  to  borrow 
foreign  capital  in  order  to  induce  the  people  in  this  country  to  redeposit  their 
savings  in  the  banks? 

Why  do  not  these  financiers  apply  the  remedy  to  the  diseased  part?  If  the 
gentleman  from  New  York  (Mr.  Hendrix),  to  whom  I  listened  with  pleasure, 
and  who  said,  "I  have  come  into  this  Hall  as  a  banker,  I  am  here  as  the  presi- 
dent of  a  national  bank,"  desires  to  restore  confidence,  let  him  propose  for  the 
consideration  of  the  members  a  bill  to  raise,  by  a  small  tax  upon  deposits,  a  sum 
sufficient  to  secure  depositors  against  possible  loss;  or  a  bill  to  compel  stock- 
holders to  put  up  security  for  their  double  liability;  or  to  prevent  stockholders 
or  officers  from  wrecking  a  bank  to  carry  on  their  private  business;  or  to  limit 
the  liabilities  which  a  bank  can  assume  upon  a  given  amount  of  capital,  so  that 
there  will  be  more  margin  to  protect  its  creditors;  or  a  bill  to  make  more 
severe  the  punishment  for  embezzlement,  so  that  a  man  can  not  rob  a  bank  of  a 
half  million  and  escape  with  five  years,  and  can  not  be  boarded  at  a  hotel  by  a 
marshal,  while  the  small  thief  suffers  in  a  dungeon.  Let  him  propose  some  real 
relief  and  this  House  will  be  glad  to  co-operate  with  him. 

Or,  if  there  is  immediate  relief  necessary  in  the  increased  issue  of  paper 
money,  let  our  financiers  press  the  suggestion  made  by  the  gentleman  from 
Ohio  (Mr.  Johnson),  viz.,  that  the  holders  of  Government  bonds  be  allowed 
to  deposit  them  and  draw  the  face  in  Treasury  notes  by  remitting  the  interest 
and  with  the  power  of  redeeming  the  bonds  at  any  time.  This  will  give  imme- 
diate relief  and  will  save  the  Government  interest  on  the  bonds  while  the  money 
is  out.  But  no,  the  only  remedy  proposed  by  these  financiers  at  this  time, 
when  business  is  at  a  standstill  and  when  men  are  suffering  unemployed,  is  a 
remedy  which  will  enable  them  to  both  control  the  currency  and  reap  pecuniary 
profit  through  its  issue. 

One  of  the  benefits  of  the  Sherman  law,  so  far  as  the  currency  is  concerned, 
is  that  it  compels  the  issue  of  a  large  amount  of  money  annually,  and  but  for 
this  issue  the  present  financial  panic  would,  in  my  judgment,  be  far  more  severe 
than  it  is.  That  we  need  an  annual  increase  in  the  currency  is  urged  by  Mr. 
Sherman  himself  in  a  speech  advocating  the  passage  of  the  Sherman  law.  On 
the  Sth  day  of  June,  1890,  he  said  in  the  Senate: 

Under  the  law  of  February,  1878,  the  purchase  of  $2,000,000  worth  of  silver  bullion  a 
month  has  by  coinage  produced  annually  an  average  of  nearly  $3,000,000  per  month  for 
a  period  of  twelve  years,  but  this  amount.  In  view  of  the  retirement  of  the  bank  notes, 
will  not  Increase  our  currency  In  proportion  to  our  increasing  population.  If  our  present 
currency  is  estimated  at  $1,400,000,000,  and  our  population  Is  increasing  at  the  ratio  of  3 
per  cent,  per  annum,  It  would  require  $42,000,000  increased  circulation  each  year  to  keep 
pace  with  the  increase  of  population;  but  as  the  increase  of  population  Is  accompanied  by 
a  still  greater  ratio  of  Increase  of  wealth  and  business.  It  was  thought  that  an  Immediate 
increase  of  circulation  might  be  obtained  by  larger  purchases  of  silver  bullion  to  an 
amount  sufficient  to  make  good  the  requirement  of  bank  notes  and  keep  pace  with  the 
growth  of  population.  Assuming  that  $54,000,000  a  year  of  additional  currency  Is  needed 
upon  this  basis,  that  amount  is  provided  for  in  this  bill  by  the  Issue  of  Treasury  notes 
In  exchange  for  bullion  at  the  market  price. 


106  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

This  amount,  by  the  fall  in  the  price  of  bullion  silver,  has  been  largely  re- 
duced. Shall  we  wipe  it  out  entirely?  He  insisted  that  the  Sherman  law  gave 
to  the  people  more  money  than  the  Bland  law,  and  upon  that  ground  its 
passage  was  defended  before  the  people.  Could  it  have  been  passed  had  it 
given  less  than  the  Bland  law?  Who  would  have  dared  to  defend  it  if  it  had 
provided  for  no  money  at  all? 

What  provision  shall  be  made  for  the  future?  Upon  that  question  our 
opponents  are  silent.  The  bill  which  they  have  proposed  leaves  us  with  no 
increased  currency  provided  for.  Some  of  the  advocates  of  a  gold  standard, 
in  the  defense  of  their  theory,  find  it  necessary  to  dispute  every  well-established 
principle  of  finance. 

We  are  told  that  as  civilization  increases  credit  takes  the  place  of  money 
and  that  the  volume  of  real  money  can  be  diminished  without  danger.  That 
recalls  the  experience  of  the  man  who  conceived  the  idea  that  a  fish  could 
be  made  to  live  without  water.  As  the  story  goes,  he  put  a  herring,  fresh  from 
the  sea,  in  a  jar  of  salt  water.  By  removing  a  little  every  morning  and  adding 
rainwater  he  gradually  accustomed  it  to  fresh  water.  Then  by  gradually  remov- 
ing the  fresh  water  he  accustomed  it  to  air  and  finally  kept  it  in  a  cage  like  a 
bird.  One  day,  in  his  absence,  his  servant  placed  a  cup  of  water  in  the  cage  in 
order  that  the  fish  might  moisten  its  food;  but  alas!  when  the  master  came 
home  he  found  that  the  fish  had  thoughtlessly  put  its  head  into  the  water  and 
drowned! 

From  the  arguments  of  some  of  our  opponents  we  might  be  led  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  time  would  come  when  money  would  not  only  be  unneces- 
sary but  really  dangerous. 

The  question,  Mr.  Speaker,  is  whether  we  shall  increase  our  supply  of  pri- 
mary money,  as  we  do  when  we  increase  our  gold  and  silver,  or  whether  we 
shair  increase  our  promises  to  pay  real  money,  as  we  do  when  we  increase  na- 
tional bank  notes. 

Mr.  Bland.     Will  the  gentleman  permit  a  suggestion? 

Mr.  Bryan.    Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Bland.  The  Treasury  notes  issued  under  the  law  for  the  purchase  of 
the  silver  bullion  are  legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private,  and  not  like 
bank  notes,  mere  credit  money. 

Mr.  Bryan.  I  understand  that.  I  say  they  are  primary  money;  although 
if  it  were  construed  to  mean  that  they  were  merely  a  promise  to  pay  gold,  then 
they  would  be  simply  credit  money  to  that  extent. 

Mr.  Bland.  The  distinction  I  wish  to  draw  is  this,  that  those  Treasury 
notes  issued  in  purchase  of  silver  bullion  are  legal  tender  while  a  bank  note  is 
not. 

Mr.  Bryan.     And  the  distinction  is  a  very  just  one. 

The  larger  the  superstructure  of  credit,  as  related  to  the  basis  of  metal,  the 
more  unsubstantial  our  system.  If  we  present  a  bank  note  for  payment  we 
receive  a  greenback;  if  we  present  a  greenback  for  payment,  the  treasurer  has 
a  right  to  pay  in  silver  dollars,  and  now  our  opponents  want  it  understood  that 
a  silver  dollar  is  only  a  promise  to  pay  a  gold  dollar.     Is  that  sound  money? 

No,  Mr.  Speaker;  if  metallic  money  is  sound  money,  then  we  who  insist 
upon  a  base  broad  enough  to  support  a  currency  redeemable  in  coin  on  demand, 
are  the  real  friends  of  sound  money,  and  those  are  "dangerous  fiatists"  who 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  107 

would  make  the  metallic  base  so  narrow  as  to  compel  the  Government  to 
abandon  it  for  the  preservation  of  its  people.  If  all  the  currency  is  built  upon 
the  small  basis  of  gold  those  who  hold  the  gold  will  be  the  masters  of  the  situ- 
ation. We  have  a  right  to  demand  that  the  future  financial  policy  shall  be  a 
part  of  the  repealing  act,  so  that  we  may  choose  between  it  and  what  we  have 
and  reject  it  if  it  is  less  favorable  than  the  present  law.  And  I  may  add  in  the 
language  adopted  by  the  bimetallic  league  a  few  days  ago — 

The  refusal  of  the  opponents  of  bimetallism  to  propose  any  substitute  for  the  present 
law,  or  to  elaborate  any  plan  for  the  future,  Indicates  either  an  ignorance  of  our  financial 
needs  or  an  unwillingness  to  take  the  public  Into  their  confidence. 

But,  sir,  more  serious  than  any  other  objection  which  can  be  made  to  the 
unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  is  the  incontrovertible  fact  that  a 
suspension  of  silver  would  tend  to  lower  the  price  of  silver  bullion  and  thus 
make  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  more  difficult.  That  this  will  be  the  effect 
is  proven  not  only  by  reason  but  by  the  utterances  of  Mr.  Herschell's  com- 
mittee in  discussing  the  finances  of  India.    That  report  says: 

In  December  last,  a  bill  was  introduced  in  the  Senate  to  repeal  the  Sherman  act, 
and  another  to  suspend  purchases  under  it.  Whether  any  such  measures  will  pass  Into 
law  It  is  impossible  to  foretell,  but  it  must  be  regarded  as  possible;  and  although,  in 
the  light  of  past  experience,  predictions  on  such  a  subject  must  be  made  with  caution. 
It  is  certainly  probable  that  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  act  would  be  followed  by  a  heavy 
(all  In  the  price  of  silver. 

The  first  question  for  us  to  decide  then  is,  are  we  in  favor  of  bimetallism 
or  a  universal  gold  standard?  If  we  are  in  favor  of  bimetallism,  the  next 
question  is  will  a  fall  in  the  bullion  price  of  silver  as  measured  by  gold  help 
or  hinder  bimetallism?  We  are  told  by  those  who  want  a  gold  standard  that 
it  will  help  bimetallism;  but  the  query  is,  if  it  would,  "why  do  they  favor  it?" 
It  is  sufficient  to  arouse  suspicion  when  every  advocate  of  gold  monometallism 
favors  unconditional  repeal,  and  the  more  emphatic  his  advocacy  of  gold  the 
more  earnest  his  desire  for  repeal.  Is  any  subsequent  legislation  in  behalf  of 
silver  intended?  If  so,  why  not  propose  it  now?  What  money  loaner,  loan- 
ing upon  a  mortgage,  would  be  willing  to  let  the  money  go  upon  a  promise 
that  the  mortgage  should  be  delivered  next  week?  Or  what  business  man  would 
cancel  an  obligation  today  on  the  promise  of  having  the  money  paid  tomorrow? 
Shall  we  be  more  careless  in  protecting  the  sacred  interests  of  our  constituencies 
than  a  business  man  is  in  transacting  his  business? 

What  excuse  can  we  give  to  our  people  for  releasing  what  we  have  with 
the  expectation  of  getting  something  in  the  future  when  the  advocates  of 
repeal  boldly  demand,  upon  this  floor,  the  adoption  of  a  universal  gold 
standard,  and  predict  that  its  coming  is  as  certain  as  the  rising  of  tomorrow's 
sun.  Read  the  utterances  of  these  leaders  in  the  crusade  against  silver.  Read 
the  famous  article  of  the  distinguished  gentleman  from  New  York  (Mr. 
Cockran).  Read  the  article  in  the  Forum  of  last  February,  from  the  pen  of 
Hon.  George  Fred  Williams,  who,  in  the  last  Congress,  spoke  for  those  de- 
manding  unconditional   repeal: 

In  the  efforts  which  have  thus  far  been  made  towards  a  repeal,  a  single  question 
has  been  repeated  by  the  silver  men  so  often  as  to  give  a  plain  indication  to  the  situation. 
What,  it  is  asked,  do  you  propose  to  put  in  place  of  silver  purchases?  There  never  was 
a  time  more  opportune  to  answer  definitely  this  question  with  the  single  word,  nothing. 


108  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

Let  me  join  issue  upon  this  question,  and  say  that  the  time  will  never  come 
in  this  country  when  that  word  "nothing"  will  be  accepted  as  a  satisfactory 
answer. 

They  tell  us  that  our  platform  demands  repeal,  but  does  it  demand  repeal 
only?  Shall  we  take  away  the  "cowardly  makeshift"  before  we  restore  the 
real  thing  for  which  that  "temporary  expedient"  was  substituted?  As  well  de- 
nounce one  kind  of  food  because  it  lacks  nourishment  and  then  refuse  all  food 
to  the  patient.  They  shall  not  be  permitted  to  thus  mutilate  the  platform.  No 
such  inexcusable  attempt  at  garbling  has  been  witnessed  since  the  minister 
took  from  the  sentence  "Let  him  which  is  on  the  house-top  not  come  down  to 
take  anything  out  of  his  house"  the  words  "topnot  come  down,"  and  inveighed 
against  the  feminine  habit  of  wearing  the  hair  in  a  knot  on  the  top  of  the  head. 
They  demand  of  us  unconditional  repeal.  They  demand  that  we  give  up  all 
that  we  have  in  the  way  of  silver  legislation  before  we  know  what  we  are  to 
receive.     Shall  we  surrender  on  these  terms? 

Rollin  tells  us  that  the  third  Punic  war  was  declared  by  the  Romans  and 
that  a  messenger  was  sent  to  Carthage  to  announce  the  declaration  after  the 
army  had  started  on  its  way.  The  Carthaginians  at  once  sent  representatives 
to  treat  for  peace.  The  Romans  first  demanded  the  delivery  of  three  hundred 
hostages  before  they  would  enter  into  negotiations.  When  three  hundred 
sons  of  the  nobles  had  been  given  into  their  hands  they  demanded  the  sur- 
render of  all  the  arms  and  implements  of  war  before  announcing  the  terms 
of  the  treaty.  The  conditions  were  sorrowfully  but  promptly  complied  with, 
and  the  people  who  boasted  of  a  Hannibal  and  a  Hamilcar  gave  up  to  .their 
ancient  enemies  every  weapon  of  offense  and  defense.  Then  the  Roman  consul, 
rising  up  before  the  humiliated  representatives  of  Carthage,  said: 

I  cannot  but  commend  you  for  the  readiness  with  which  you  have  obeyed  every  order. 
The  decree  of  the  Roman  Senate  is  that  Carthage  shall  be  destroyed. 

Sirs,  what  will  be  the  answer  of  the  people  whom  you  represent,  who  are 
wedded  to  the  "gold  and  silver  coinage  of  the  Constitution,"  if  you  vote  for 
unconditional  repeal  and  return  to  tell  them  that  you  were  commended  for  the 
readiness  with  which  you  obeyed  every  order,  but  that  Congress  has  decreed 
that  one-half  of  the  people's  metallic  money  shall  be  destroyed? 

They  demand  unconditional  surrender,  do  they?  Why,  sirs,  we  are  the 
ones  to  grant  terms.  Standing  by  the  pledges  of  all  the  parties  in  this  country, 
backed  by  the  history  of  a  hundred  years,  sustained  by  the  most  sacred  interests 
of  humanity  itself,  we  demand  an  unconditional  surrender  of  the  principle  of 
gold  monometallism  as  the  first  condition  of  peace.  You  demand  surrender! 
Ay,  sirs,  you  may  cry  "Peace,  peace,"  but  there  is  no  peace.  Just  so  long  as 
there  are  people  here  who  would  chain  this  country  to  a  single  gold  standard, 
there  is  war — eternal  war;  and  it  might  just  as  well  be  known  now!  I  have  said 
that  we  stand  by  the  pledges  of  all  platforms.    Let  me  quote  them: 

The  Populist  platform  adopted  by  the  national  convention  in  1892  con- 
tained these  words: 

We  demand  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  and  gold  at  the  present  legal  ratio 
of   16    to    1. 

As  the  members  of  that  party,  both  in  the  Senate  and  in  the  House,  stand 
ready  to  carry  out  the  pledge  there  made,  no  appeal  to  them  is  necessary. 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  109 

The  Republican  national  platform  adopted  in  1888  contains  this  plank: 
The  Republican  party  is  in  favor  of  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  money  and 
condemns  the  policy  of  the  Democratic  administration  in  its  eilorts  to  demonetize  silver. 

The  same  party  in  1892  adopted  a  platform  containing  the  following 
language : 

The  American  people  from  tradition  and  Interest  favor  bimetallism,  and  the  Repub- 
lican party  demands  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  standard  money,  such  restrictions 
to  be  determined  by  contemplation  of  values  of  the  two  metals,  so  that  the  purchasing 
and  debt-paying  power  of  the  dollar,  whether  of  silver,  gold,  or  paper,  shall  be  equal  at 
all  times. 

The  interests  of  the  producers  of  the  country,  its  farmers  and  its  worklngmen, 
demand  that  every  dollar,  paper  or  gold,  issued  by  the  Government,  shall  be  as  good  as  any 
other.  We  commend  the  wise  and  patriotic  steps  already  taken  by  our  Government  to 
secure  an  international  parity  of  value  between  gold  and  silver  for  use  as  money 
throughout  the  world. 

Are  the  Republican  members  of  this  House  ready  to  abandon  the  system 
which  the  American  people  favor  "from  tradition  and  interest?"  Having  won 
a  Presidential  election  upon  a  platform  which  condemned  "the  policy  of  the 
Democratic  administration  in  its  efforts  to  demonetize  silver,"  are  they  ready 
to  join  in  that  demonetization?  Having  advocated  the  Sherman  law  because  it 
gave  an  increased  use  of  silver,  are  they  ready  to  repeal  it  and  make  no  provi- 
sions for  silver  at  all?  Are  they  willing  to  go  before  the  country  confessing 
that  they  secured  the  present  law  by  sharp  practice,  and  only  adopted  it  as  an 
ingenious  device  for  preventing  free  coinage,  to  be  repealed  as  soon  as  the 
hour  of  danger  was  passed? 

The  Democratic  platform  of  1880  contained  these  words; 

Honest  money,  consisting  of  gold  and  silver,  and  paper  conTertible  Into  coin  on  de- 
mand. 

It  would  seem  that  at  that  time  silver  was  honest  money,  although  the 
bullion  value  was  considerably  below  the  coinage  value. 

In  1884  the  Democratic  platform  contained  this  plank: 

We  believe  in  honest  money,  the  gold  and  silver  coinage  of  the  Constitution,  and 
a  circulating  medium  convertible  into  such  money  without  loss. 

It  would  seem  that  at  that  time  silver  was  considered  honest  money. 

In  1888  the  Democratic  party  did  not  express  itself  on  the  money  question 
except  by  saying: 

It  renewed  the  pledge  of  Its  fidelity  to  Democratic  faith,  and  reaffirms  the  platform 
adopted  by  its  representatives  in  the  convention  of  1884. 

Since  the  platform  of  1884  commended  silver  as  an  honest  money,  we  must 
assume  that  the  reaffirming  of  that  platform  declared  anew  that  silver  was 
honest  money  as  late  as  1888,  although  at  that  time  its  bullion  value  had  fallen 
still  more. 

The  last  utterance  of  a  Democratic  national  convention  upon  this  subject 
is  contained  in  the  platform  adopted  at  Chicago  in  1892.     It  is  as  follows: 

We  denounce  the  Republican  legislation  known  as  the  Sherman  act  of  1890  as  a 
cowardly  makeshift,  fraught  with  possibilities  of  danger  in  the  future,  which  should  make 
all  its  supporters,  as  well  as  its  author,  anxious  for  its  speedy  repeal.  We  hold  to  the 
use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  the  standard  money  of  the  country,  and  to  the  coinage 
of  both  gold  and  silver  without  discrimination  against  either  metal  or  charge  for  mintage, 
but  the  dollar  unit  of  coinage  of  both  metals  must  be  of  equal  intrinsic  and  exchange- 
able value  or  be  adjusted  through  international  agreement,  or  by  such  safeguards  of  legis- 
lation as  shall   Insure   the  maintenance  of  the  parity  of  the  two  metals,   and   the   equal 


no  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

power  of  every  dollar  at  all  times  In  the  markets  and  In  the  payment  of  debts;  and  we 
demand  that  all  paper  currency  shall  be  kept  at  par  with  and  redeemable  in  such  coin. 
We  Insist  upon  this  policy  as  especially  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  farmers  and 
laboring  classes,  the  first  and  most  defenseless  victims  of  unstable  money  and  a  fluctuating 
currency. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  gold  and  silver  have  been  indissolubly  linked 
together  in  our  platforms.  Never  in  the  history  of  the  party  has  it  taken 
a  position  in  favor  of  a  gold  standard.  On  every  vote  taken  in  the  House 
and  Senate  a  majority  of  the  party  have  been  recorded  not  only  in  favor 
of  bimetallism,  but  for  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver 
at  the  ratio  of  i6  to  i. 

The  last  platform  pledges  us  to  the  use  of  both  metals  as  standard  money 
and  to  the  free  coinage  of  both  metals  at  a  fixed  ratio.  Does  any  one  believe 
that  Mr.  Cleveland  could  have  been  elected  President  upon  a  platform  de- 
claring in  favor  of  the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherm.an  law?  Can 
we  go  back  to  our  people  and  tell  them  that,  after  denouncing  for  twenty  years 
the  crime  of  1873,  we  have  at  last  accepted  it  as  a  blessing?  Shall  bimetallism 
received  its  deathblow  in  the  House  of  its  friends,  and  in  the  very  Hall  where 
innumerable  vows  have  been  registered  in  its  defense?  What  faith  can  be 
placed  in  platforms  if  their  pledges  can  be  violated  with  impunity?  Is  it  right 
to  rise  above  the  power  which  created  us?  Is  it  patriotic  to  refuse  that  legisla- 
tion in  favor  of  gold  and  silver  which  a  majority  of  the  people  have  always 
demanded?  Is  it  necessary  to  betray  all  parties  in  order  to  treat  this  subject 
in  a  "nonpartisan"  way? 

The  President  has  recommended  unconditional  repeal.  It  is  not  suffi- 
cient to  say  that  he  is  honest — so  were  the  mothers,  who,  with  misguided  zeal 
threw  their  children  into  the  Ganges.  The  question  is  not  "Is  he  honest?"  but 
"Is  he  right?"  He  won  the  confidence  of  the  toilers  of  this  country  because 
he  taught  that  "public  office  is  a  public  trust,"  and  because  he  convinced  them 
of  his  courage  and  his  sincerity.  But  are  they  willing  to  say,  in  the  language 
of  Job,  "Though  He  slay  me,  yet  will  I  trust  Him?"  Whence  comes  this 
irresistible  demand  for  unconditional  repeal?  Are  not  the  representatives  here 
as  near  to  the  people  and  as  apt  to  know  their  wishes?  Whence  comes  the 
demand?  Not  from  the  workshop  and  the  farm,  not  from  the  workingmen  of 
this  country,  who  create  its  wealth  in  time  of  peace  and  protect  its  flag  in  time 
of  war,  but  from  the  middle-men,  from  what  are  termed  the  "business  interests," 
and  largely  from  that  class  which  can  force  Congress  to  let  it  issue  money  at  a 
pecuniary  profit  to  itself  if  silver  is  abandoned.  The  President  has  been  de- 
ceived. He  can  no  more  judge  the  wishes  of  the  great  mass  of  our  people  by 
the  expressions  of  these  men  than  he  can  measure  the  ocean's  silent  depths 
by  the  foam  upon  its  waves. 

Mr.  Powderly,  who  spoke  at  Chicago  a  few  days  ago  in  favor  of  the  free 
coinage  of  silver  at  the  present  ratio  and  against  the  unconditional  repeal  of 
the  Sherman  law,  voiced  the  sentiment  of  more  laboring  men  than  have  ever 
addressed  the  President  or  this  House  in  favor  of  repeal.  Go  among  the 
agricultural  classes;  go  among  the  poor,  whose  little  is  as  precious  to  them  as 
the  rich  man's  fortune  is  to  him,  and  whose  families  are  as  dear,  and  you  will 
not  find  the  haste  to  destroy  the  issue  of  money  or  the  unfriendliness  to  silver 
which   is   manifested   in   money   centers. 


•J 

►—I 
> 

o 

to 

u 

< 

w 
u 
^ 
w 
o 

H- 1 

CO 

w 
< 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  113 

This  question  can  not  be  settled  by  typewritten  recommendations  and  sug- 
gestions made  by  boards  of  trade  and  sent  broadcast  over  the  United  States. 
It  can  only  be  settled  by  the  great  mass  of  the  voters  of  this  country  who  stand 
like  the  Rock  of  Gibraltar  for  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver. 

There  are  thousands,  yes,  tens  of  thousands,  aye,  even  millions,  who  have 
not  yet  "bowed  the  knee  to  Baal."  Let  the  President  take  courage.  Muehl- 
bach  relates  an  incident  in  the  life  of  the  great  military  hero  of  France.  At 
Marengo  the  Man  of  Destiny,  sad  and  disheartened,  thought  the  battle  lost. 
He  called  to  a  drummer  boy  and  ordered  him  to  beat  a  retreat.    The  lad  replied: 

Sire,  I  do  not  know  how.  Dessalx  has  never  taught  me  retreat,  but  I  can  beat  a 
charge.  Oh,  I  can  beat  a  charge  that  would  make  the  dead  fall  into  line!  I  beat 
that  charge  at  the  Bridge  of  Lodi;  I  beat  it  at  Mount  Tabor;  I  beat  it  at  the  Pyramids. 
Oh,  may  I  beat  it  here? 

The  charge  was  ordered,  the  battle  won,  and  Marengo  was  added  to  the 
victories  of  Napoleon.  Oh,  let  our  gallant  leader  draw  inspiration  from  the 
street  gamin  of  Paris.  In  the  face  of  an  enemy  proud  and  confident  the 
President  has  wavered.  Engaged  in  the  battle  royal  between  the  "money 
power  and  the  common  people"  he  has  ordered  a  retreat.  Let  him  not  be 
dismayed. 

He  has  won  greater  victories  than  Napoleon,  for  he  is  a  warrior  who 
has  conquered  without  a  sword.  He  restored  fidelity  in  the  public  service;  he 
converted  Democratic  hope  into  realization;  he  took  up  the  banner  of  tariff  re- 
form and  carried  it  to  triumph.  Let  him  continue  that  greater  fight  for  "the 
gold  and  silver  coinage  of  the  Constitution,"  to  which  three  national  plat- 
forms have  pledged  him.  Let  his  clarion  voice  call  the  party  hosts  to  arms; 
let  him  but  speak  the  language  of  the  Senator  from  Texas,  in  reply  to  those 
who  would  destroy  the  use  of  silver: 

In  this  hour  fraught  with  peril  to  the  whole  country,  I  appeal  to  the  unpur- 
chased representatives  of  the  American  people  to  meet  this  bold  and  insolent  demand 
like  men.  Let  us  stand  in  the  breach  and  call  the  battle  on  and  never  leave  the 
field  until  the  people's  money  shall  be  restored  to  the  mints  on  equal  terms  with 
gold,  as  it  was  years  ago. 

Let  this  command  be  given,  and  the  air  will  resound  with  the  tramp  of  men 
scarred  in  a  score  of  battles  for  the  people's  rights.  Let  this  command  be 
given  and  this  Marengo  will  be  our  glory  and  not  our  shame. 

Well  has  it  been  said  by  the  Senator  from  Missouri  (Mr.  Vest)  that  we 
have  come  to  the  parting  of  the  ways.  Today  the  Democratic  party  stands 
between  two  great  forces,  each  inviting  its  support.  On  the  one  side  stand  the 
corporate  interests  of  the  nation,  its  moneyed  institutions,  its  aggregations  of 
wealth  and  capital,  imperious,  arrogant,  compassionless.  They  demand  special 
legislation,  favors,  privileges,  and  immunities.  They  can  subscribe  magnifi- 
cently to  campaign  funds;  they  can  strike  down  opposition  with  their  all- 
pervading  influence,  and,  to  those  who  fawn  and  flatter,  bring  ease  and  plenty. 
They  demand  that  the  Democratic  party  shall  become  their  agent  to  execute 
their  merciless  decrees. 

On  the  other  side  stands  that  unnumbered  throng  which  gave  a  name  to  the 

Democratic    party,    and    for    which    it    has    assumed    to    speak.      Work-worn 

and  dust-begrimed,  they  make  their  sad  appeal.     They  hear  of  average  wealth 

increased  on  every  side  and  feel  the  inequality  of  its  distribution.    They  see  an 

7 


114  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

over-production  of  everything  desired  because  of  the  underproduction  of  the 
ability  to  buy.  They  can  not  pay  for  loyalty  except  with  their  suffrages,  and 
can  only  punish  betrayal  with  their  condemnation.  Although  the  ones  who 
most  deserve  the  fostering  care  of  Government,  their  cries  for  help  too  often 
beat  in  vain  against  the  outer  wall,  while  others  less  deserving  find  ready  access 
to  legislative  halls. 

This  army,  vast  and  daily  growing,  begs  the  party  to  be  its  champion 
in  the  present  conflict.  It  cannot  press  its  claims  'mid  sounds  of  revelry.  Its 
phalanxes  do  not  form  in  grand  parade,  nor  has  it  gaudy  banners  floating  on 
the  breeze.  Its  battle  hymn  is  "Home,  Sweet  Home,"  its  war  cry  "equality 
before  the  law."  To  the  Democratic  party,  standing  between  these  two  irrec- 
oncilable forces,  uncertain  to  which  side  to  turn,  and  conscious  that  upon  its 
choice  its  fate  depends,  come  the  words  of  Israel's  second  lawgiver:  "Choose 
you  this  day  whom  ye  will  serve."  What  will  the  answer  be?  Let  me  invoke 
the  memory  of  him  whose  dust  made  sacred  the  soil  of  Monticello  when  he 

joined 

The    dead    but    sceptered    sovereigns    who    still    rule 
Our  spirits  from  their  urns. 

He  was  called  a  demagogue  and  his  followers  a  mob,  but  the  immortal 
Jefferson  dared  to  follow  the  best  promptings  of  his  heart.  He  placed  man 
above  matter,  humanity  above  property,  and,  spurning  the  bribes  of  wealth  and 
power,  pleaded  the  cause  of  the  common  people.  It  was  this  devotion  to  their 
interests  which  made  his  party  invincible  while  he  lived  and  will  make  his  name 
revered  while  history  endures.  And  what  message  comes  to  us  from  the 
Hermitage?  When  a  crisis  like  the  present  arose  and  the  national  bank  of  his 
day  sought  to  control  the  politics  of  the  nation,  God  raised  up  an  Andrew 
Jackson,  who  had  the  courage  to  grapple  with  that  great  enemy,  and  by  over- 
throwing it,  he  made  himself  the  idol  of  the  people  and  reinstated  the  Demo- 
cratic party  in  public  confidence.  What  will  the  decision  be  today.  The  Demo- 
cratic party  has  won  the  greatest  success  in  its  history.  Standing  upon  this 
victory-crowned  summit,  will  it  turn  its  face  to  the  rising  or  the  setting  sun? 
Will  it  choose  blessings  or  cursings — life  or  death — which?  Which? 

The  bill  passed  the  House  by  a  considerable  majority  and  after 
nearly  two  months  of  de-bate  in  the  Senate,  came  back  to  the  House 
with  an  amendment. 

On  Nov.  1st,  1893,  I  again  spoke  on  this  question: 

Third  Speech  Against  Unconditional  Repeal. 

Mr.  Speaker:  Nothing  that  can  be  said  at  this  time  will  affect  the  fate 
of  this  bill,  but  those  gentlemen  who  vote  for  it  should  do  so  with  a  full 
and  clear  understanding  of  what  they  are  doing.  We  have  been  told,  sir, 
that  the  Democratic  platform  adopted  in  1892  demanded  the  unconditional 
repeal  of  the  Sherman  law.  No  person  has  brought  into  this  House  a  single 
platform  utterance  which  will  bear  out  that  assertion.  The  platform  does 
not  even  demand  repeal,  not  to  speak  of  unconditional  repeal.  It  says: 
"We  denounce  the  Republican  legislation  known  as  the  Sherman  act  of  1890 
as  a  cowardly   makeshift   fraught   with   possibilities   of  danger   in  the   future, 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 


115 


which  should  make  all  of  its  supporters,  as  well  as  its  author,  anxious  for  its 
speedy  repeal."  Its  author  does  seem  to  be  "anxious  for  its  speedy  repeal," 
and  in  this  desire  many  of  its  supporters  join  with  him;  but  why  should  a 
Democratic  Congress  secure  that  repeal  without  first  restoring,  at  least,  the 
law  which  the  Sherman  law  repealed?  Then,  too,  the  denunciation  contained 
in  the  platform  is  directed  against  the  whole  law,  not  simply  against  the  pur- 
chase clause.  Yet  we  are  urged  to  support  this  bill  for  the  unconditional 
repeal  of  the  purchase  clause  only  as  a  Democratic  measure.  What  is  the  his- 
tory of  this  bill?  It  is  identical  in  purpose  and  almost  identical  in  language 
with  a  bill  introduced  by  Senator  Sherman  July  14,  1892. 

To  show  the  similarity  between  the  bill  introduced  then  by  Senator  Sher- 
man and  the  bill  introduced  since  by  Mr.  Wilson,  I  place  the  two  bills  in  parallel 
columns: 


Fifty-second  Congress,  first  session.  S. 
3423,  introduced  in  the  Senate  July  14, 
1892,  by  Mr.  Sherman. 
A  bill  for  the  repeal  of  certain  parts  of 
the  act  directing  the  purchase  of  silver 
bullion  and  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes 
thereon,  and  for  other  purposes,  ap- 
proved July  14,  1890. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House 
of  Representatives  of  the  United  States 
of  America  in  Congress  assembled.  That 
so  much  of  the  act  entitled  "An  act  di- 
recting the  purchase  of  silver  bullion  and 
the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  thereon,  and 
for  other  purposes,"  approved  July  14, 
1890,  as  directs  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury to  purchase,  from  time  to  time,  silver 
bullion  to  the  aggregate  amount  of  4,500,- 
000  ounces,  or  so  much  thereof  as  may 
be  offered  in  each  month,  at  the  market 
price  thereof,  and  to  issue  in  payment  for 
such  purchases  of  silver  bullion  Treasury 
notes  of  the  United  States  is  hereby  re- 
pealed, to  take  effect  on  the  1st  day  of 
January,  1893;  Provided,  That  this  act 
shall  not  in  any  way  affect  or  impair  or 
change  the  legal  qualities,  redemption  or 
use  of  the  Treasury  notes  issued  under 
said  act. 


Fifty-third  Congress,  first  session.  H.   R. 
1,    introduced   in   the   House   August  11, 
1893,  by  Mr.  Wilson. 
A   bill   to   repeal   a   part   of   an    act,    ap- 
proved  July   14,    1890,    entitled    "An   act 
directing  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion 
and  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  thereon, 
and  for  other  purposes." 
Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House 
of    Representatives   of    the    United    States 
of  America  in   Congress  assembled,   That 
so  much  of  the  act  approved  July  14,  1890, 
entitled  "An  act  directing  the  purchase  of 
silver  bullion  and  issue  of  Treasury  notes 
thereon,   and  for  other  purposes,"   as  di- 
rects   the    Secretary    of    the    Treasury    to 
purchase,   from  time  to  time,   silver  bul- 
lion to  the  aggregate  amount  of  4,500,000 
ounces,  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  of- 
fered in  each  month,  at  the  market  price 
thereof,  not  exceeding  $1  for  371.25  grains 
of  pure   silver,   and   to   issue   in   payment 
for  such  purchases  Treasury  notes  of  the 
United  States,  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby 
repealed;    but    this   repeal    shall    not    im- 
pair or   in   any   manner  affect  the   legal- 
tender  quality  of  the  standard  silver  dol- 
lars heretofore  coined;  and  the  faith  and 
credit    of    the    United    States    are    hereby 
pledged    to    maintain    the    parity    of    the 
standard    gold    and    silver    coins    of    the 
United   States  at  the  present   legal  ratio, 
or  such  other  ratio  as  may  be  established 
by  law. 

Does  the  Senator  from  Ohio  originate  Democratic  measures? 

The  gentlemen  who  favor  this  bill  may  follow  the  leadership  of  Senator 
Sherman  and  call  it  Democratic;  but  until  he  is  converted  to  true  principles 
of  finance  I  shall  not  follow  him,  nor  will  I  apply  to  his  financial  policy  the 
name  of  Democracy  or  honesty.  The  Wilson  bill  passed  the  House,  but  a  ma- 
jority of  the  Democrats  voted  in  favor  of  substituting  the  Bland  law  in  the  place 
of  the  Sherman  law  before  they  voted  for  unconditional  repeal,  showing  that 


116 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 


they  were  not  for  unconditional  repeal  until  Republican  votes  had  deprived 
them  of  that  which  they  preferred  to  unconditional  repeal,  namely,  the  Bland 
law.  When  the  bill  in  its  present  form  was  reported  to  the  Senate,  four  of  the 
Democratic  members  of  the  Finance  Committee  opposed  the  bill  and  only  two 
Democrats  favored  it.  When  the  bill  passed  the  Senate,  twenty-two  Democrats 
were  recorded  in  favor  of  the  bill  and  twenty-two  against  it,  and  that,  too,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  every  possible  influence  was  brought  to  bear  to  secure 
Democratic  support  for  the  measure.  Before  a  vote  was  reached  thirty-seven 
Democratic  Senators  agreed  to  a  compromise,  so  that  this  bill  does  not  come 
to  us  expressing  the  free  and  voluntary  desire  of  the  Democratic  party. 

Not  only  does  unconditional  repeal  fail  to  carry  out  the  pledge  made  in  the 
last  national  platform,  but  it  disregards  the  most  important  part  of  the  financial 
plank,  in  not  redeeming  the  promise  to  maintain  "the  coinage  of  both  gold  and 
silver,  without  discrimination  against  either  metal  or  charge  for  mintage." 
That  promise  meant  something.  It  was  a  square  declaration  in  favor  of  bimet- 
allism. The  tail  to  this  bill,  added  in  the  Senate  as  an  amendment,  pretends 
to  promise  a  future  fulfillment  of  platform  pledges.  We  are  not  here  to  prom- 
ise, but  to  fulfill.  We  are  not  here  to  renew  platform  pledges,  but  to  carry  them 
out.  But  even  if  it  were  our  duty  to  postpone  bimetallism  and  record  another 
promise,  the  Senate  amendment  does  not  contain  the  vital  words  of  the  financial 
plank.  The  Senate  amendment  eliminates  from  the  platform  the  important 
declaration  in  favor  of  "the  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  without  discrimina- 
tion against  either  metal  or  charge  for  mintage."  To  show  the  important  dif- 
ference between  the  Senate  amendment  and  that  part  of  our  platform,  I  arrange 
them  in  parallel  columns: 

THE  SENATE  AMENDMENT. 
And  it  Is  hereby  declared  to  be  the  pol- 
icy of  the  United  States  to  continue  the 
use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  standard 
money,  and  to  coin  both  gold  and  silver 
into  money  of  equal  intrinsic  and  ex- 
changeable value,  such  equality  to  be  se- 
cured through  international  agreement, 
or  by  such  safeguards  of  legislation  as 
will  insure  the  maintenance  of  the  parity 
in  value  of  the  coins  of  the  two  metals 
and  the  equal  power  of  every  dollar  at 
all  times  in  the  markets  and  in  the  pay- 
ment of  debts.  And  it  is  hereby  further 
declared  that  the  efforts  of  the  Govern- 
ment should  be  steadily  directed  to  the 
establishment  of  such  safe  system  of  bi- 
metallism as  will  maintain  at  all  times 
the  equal  power  of  every  dollar  coined  or 
Issued  by  the  United  States,  in  the  mar- 
kets and  in  the  payment  of  debts. 

Were  those  important  words  striken  out  by  intention  or  was  it  simply  an 
oversight?  No,  Mr.  Speaker,  those  words  were  purposely  left  out  because 
those  who  are  behind  the  bill  never  intend  to  carry  out  the  Democratic  plat- 
form; and  if  we  can  judge  their  purpose  by  their  acts,  those  who  prepared  the 
platform  never  intended  when  it  was  written  that  it  should  be  fulfilled  after  it 
had  secured  the  suffrage  of  the  American  people. 


DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM. 
We  hold  to  the  use  of  both  gold  and 
silver  as  the  standard  money  of  the  coun- 
try, and  to  the  coinage  of  both  gold  and 
silver  without  discrimination  against 
either  metal  or  charge  for  mintage,  but 
the  dollar  unit  of  coinage  of  both  metals 
must  be  of  equal  intrinsic  and  exchange- 
able value  or  be  adjusted  through  inter- 
national agreement,  or  by  such  safe 
guards  of  legislation  as  shall  insure  the 
maintenance  of  the  parity  of  the  two  met- 
als and  the  equal  power  of  every  dollar 
at  all  times  in  the  markets  and  in  the 
payment  of  all  debts. 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.      .  117 

When  they  had  a  strike  at  Homestead  some  time  ago  they  used  force  to 
remedy  what  they  considered  their  grievances.  We  said  then  that  the  ballot, 
not  the  bullet,  was  the  means  by  which  the  American  people  redressed  their 
grievances.  What  shall  we  say  now  when  people  elected  upon  a  platform  and 
pledged  to  a  principle  disregard  those  pledges  when  they  come  to  the  legislative 
halls?  It  is  a  blow  at  representative  government  which  we  cannot  afford  to 
give.  We  are  not  sent  here  because  we  know  more  than  others  and  can  think 
for  them.  We  are  sent  here  to  carry  out  the  wishes,  to  represent  the  interests, 
and  to  protect  the  rights  of  those  who  sent  us.  What  defense  can  we  make  if 
this  bill  is  passed?  It  is  not  demanded  by  the  people;  the  farmers  and  laborers 
who  constitute  the  great  bulk  of  our  people  have  never  asked  for  it;  those  who 
speak  for  their  organizations  have  never  prayed  for  it. 

So  far  as  the  laborer  has  been  heard  from,  he  has  denounced  unconditional 
repeal;  so  far  as  the  farmer  has  been  heard  from,  he  has  denounced  uncondi- 
tional repeal.  Who  gave  the  eastern  capitalists  the  right  to  speak  for  these 
men.  It  is  a  contest  between  the  producers  of  wealth  and  those  who  exchange 
or  absorb  it.  We  have  heard  a  great  deal  about  business  interests  and  business 
men  demanding  repeal.  Who  are  the  business  men?  Are  not  those  entitled  to 
that  name  who  are  engaged  in  the  production  of  the  necessaries  of  life?  Is  the 
farmer  less  a  business  man  than  the  broker,  because  the  former  spends  three 
hundred  and  sixty-five  days  in  producing  a  crop  which  will  not  bring  him 
over  a  dollar  a  day  for  his  labor,  while  the  latter  can  make  ten  times  the  farmer's 
annual  income  in  one  successful  bet  on  the  future  price  of  the  farmer's  product? 
I  protest,  Mr.  Speaker,  against  the  use  of  the  name  business  men  in  such  a 
way  as  to  exclude  the  largest  and  most  valuable  class  of  business  men  in  the 
country.  Unconditional  repeal  stops  the  issue  of  money.  With  this  law  gone, 
no  more  silver  certificates  can  be  issued,  and  no  more  silver  bought.  There 
is  no  law  to  provide  for  the  issue  of  greenbacks.  We  must  rely  for  our  addi- 
tional currency  upon  our  share  of  the  limited  supply  of  gold,  and  the  bank 
notes  which  national  banks  may  find  it  profitable  to  issue. 

Does  anybody  deny  that  our  currency  must  increase  as  our  population 
increases  and  as  our  need  for  money  increases?  Does  any  one  believe  that  our 
need  for  money  can  be  supplied  without  affirmative  legislation?  Is  it  any 
more  wise  to  destroy  the  present  means  for  increasing  our  currency  before  a 
new  plan  is  adopted  than  it  would  be  to  repeal  the  McKinley  tariff  act  without 
putting  some  other  revenue  measure  in  its  place?  Our  platform  says:  "AVe  de- 
nounce the  McKinley  tariff  law  enacted  by  the  Fifty-first  Congress  as  the  cul- 
minating atrocity  of  class  legislation,"  and  "we  promise  its  repeal  as  one  of 
the  beneficent  results  that  will  follow  the  action  of  the  people  in  intrusting 
power  to  the  Democratic  party."  We  also  demanded  a  tariff  for  revenue  only. 
Is  there  any  more  reason  for  separating  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  from  the 
enactment  of  bimetallic  legislation  than  there  is  for  separating  the  repeal  of 
the  McKinley  bill  from  the  enactment  of  a  "tariff  for  revenue  only"  measure? 
Having  harmonized  with  Mr.  Sherman,  shall  we  proceed  to  harmonize  with 
Mr.  McKinley?  There  are  many  Republicans  who  tell  us  now  that  the  pros- 
pect of  tariff  reduction  has  destroyed  confidence  to  a  greater  extent  than  the 
Sherman  law  has. 

In   order  to  avoid   another  manufacturer's  panic  will   it  be  necessary  to 


118  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

abandon  another  tenet  of  the  Democratic  faith  and  give  up  all  hope  of  tariff 
reduction?  Unconditional  repeal  will  make  it  more  difficult  to  restore  free 
bimetallic  coinage.  It  cannot  aid  bimetallism  without  disappointing  the  dear- 
est hopes  of  those  gentlemen  who  are  most  active  in  its  support.  If  it  were 
not  so  serious  a  matter  it  would  be  interesting  to  note  the  mortification  which 
must  come  either  to  the  gold  supporters  or  to  the  silver  supporters  of  im- 
conditional  repeal.  They  are  working  in  perfect  harmony  to  secure 
exactly  opposite  results  by  means  of  this  bill.  Who  will  be  deceived?  This 
is  only  the  first  step.  It  will  be  followed  by  an  effort  to  secure  an  issue  of 
bonds  to  maintain  gold  payments.  Senator  Sherman,  the  new  prophet  of 
Democracy,  has  already  stated  that  bonds  must  be  issued,  and  we  know  that 
last  spring  the  whole  pressure  of  the  monied  interest  was  brought  to  bear  to 
secure  an  issue  of  bonds  then.  Do  you  say  that  Congress  would  not  dare  to 
authorize  the  increase  of  the  public  debt  in  time  of  peace?  What  is  there  that 
this  Congress  may  not  dare  to  do  after  it  has  given  its  approval  to  the  iniquitous 
measure  now  before  us? 

It  has  also  been  suggested  that  the  silver  dollars  now  on  hand  be  limited 
in  their  legal-tender  qualities.  We  need  not  be  surprised  if  this  suggestion 
assumes  real  form  in  attempted  legislation.  It  has  already  been  proposed  to 
increase  the  circulation  of  national  banks  and  thus  approve  of  a  policy  which 
our  party  has  always  denounced.  But  we  need  be  surprised  at-  nothing  now. 
The  party  can  never  undergo  a  more  complete  transformation  upon  any  ques- 
tion than  it  has  upon  the  silver  question,  if  the  representatives  really  reflect 
the  sentiments  of  those  who  sent  them  here.  We  have  been  told  of  the  great 
blessings  which  are  to  follow  unconditional  repeal.  Every  rise  in  stocks  has 
been  paraded  as  a  forerunner  of  coming  prosperity.  I  have  taken  occasion  to 
examine  the  quotations  on  one  of  the  staple  products  of  the  farm,  and  in  order 
to  secure  a  basis  for  calculation,  I  have  taken  wheat  for  December  delivery. 

I  give  below  the  New  York  quotations  on  December  wheat,  taken  from  the 
New  York  Price  Current.  The  quotations  are  for  the  first  day  of  the  months 
of  June,  July,  August,  September,  October  and  October  30,  or  as  near  those 
dates  as  could  be  gathered  from  the  Price  Current,  which  is  published  about 
twice  a  week: 

June  1,   December  wheat,  83%. 

(Special  session  called  June  30,   to  meet  August  7.) 

July  1,  December  wheat,  81%. 

August  1,   December  wheat,   75. 

(Congress  convened  August  7.) 

September  1,  December  wheat,  74%. 

(Senate  debate  continuing.) 

October   1,    December   wheat,    74%. 

(Compromise  abandoned  and  repeal  assured  about  October  23.) 

October  30,   December  wheat,   71%. 

(Unconditional  repeal  passed  Senate  evening  of  October  30.) 

October  31,    December   wheat   (post-marked   report),    69%. 

The  following  is  an  extract  from  the  market  report  touching  the  general 
situation  in  New  York  and  the  grain  market  in  Chicago.     The  report  appears 
in  the  morning  issue  of  the  Washington  Post,  November  i. 
Big   Scramble   to   Sell— The   Change  of   Sentiment  was   a   Surprise   to   the   Street— London 

Began  the  Raid— Those  Who  Believed  the  Passage  of  the  Repeal  Bill  Would  Lead 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  119 

to  Heavy  Buying  Orders,  and  Had  Purchased  for  a  Rise,  Also  Turned  Sellert 
and  Sacrificed  Their  Holdings— Rallied  a  Little  as  the  Market  Closed— The  Busi- 
ness on  'Change. 

New  York,  Oct.  3L 
Yesterday's  vote  by  the  Senate  repealing  the  Sherman  silver  lay  did  not  have 
the  effect  on  the  stock  market  that  the  bulls  expected.  In  the  first  place,  London 
cabled  orders  to  sell  various  stocks,  much  to  the  disappointment  of  local  operators, 
who  were  confident  that  the  action  of  the  Senate  would  result  In  a  flood  of  buying 
orders.  The  liquidations  for  foreign  account  induced  selling  by  operators  who  had 
added  to  their  lines  on  the  belief  that  the  repeal  of  the  silver  purchase  act  would 
Instantaneously  bring  about  a  boom. 

When  it  was  seen  that  Instead  of  buying  the  outside  public  was  disposed  to  sell 
the  weak-kneed  bulls  tried  to  get  out. 

Chicago,  October  31. 
Wheat  was  very  weak  throughout  the  entire  session  today.  The  opening  was 
about  1  cent  per  bushel  lower  than  the  closing  figures  of  Saturday,  became  weak,  and 
after  some  minor  fluctuations  prices  further  declined  1%  to  2,  then  held  steady,  and 
the  closing  was  2*^  to  2%  lower  than  the  last  prices  of  Saturday.  There  was  some 
surprise  at  the  course  of  the  market,  which  became  consternation,  and  at  one  time 
amounted  almost  to  a  panic,  when  little  or  no  reaction  appeared  and  the  price  con- 
tinued to  sink.  The  fact  of  the  matter  was  that  traders  were  loaded  with  wheat 
and  were  merely  waiting  for  the  opportunity  to  sell.  The  bulge  toward  the  end  of 
last  week  gave  them  this  chance  and  they  were  quick  to  take  advantage  of  it.  The 
silver  repeal  bill  having  been  discounted  for  several  days  had  little  or  no  effect  In 
the  matter  of  sustaining  prices.  New  York  stocks  were  weak  and  much  lower  and 
this  speculative  feeling  was  communicated  to/  wheat.  New  Yorkers  who  have  seen 
the  big  bulls  for  so  long  were  selling  today,  and  It  was  said  that  there  were  numerous 
orders  from  abroad  on  that  side  of  the  market. 

Corn  was  dull,  the  range  being  within  three-eighths  of  a  cent  limit.  The  tone 
was  steady  and  at  times  an  undertone  of  firmness  was  noticeable,  although  prices  did 
not  show  any  essential  changes.  The  accumulations  of  cash  corn  during  the  past 
three  days  were  the  cause  of  a  somewhat  liberal  offering  of  futures  early,  but  after 
a  time  they  became  light  and  the  market  dull.  The  opening  was  at  a  decline  of  %  to 
%,  but  on  a  good  demand  an  advance  of  %  was  made,  receding  ^A  to  %  later,  and 
closing  %  to  %  under  the  final  figures  of  Saturday. 

Oats  were  featureless,  but  the  feeling  was  steady.  There  was  very  little  trading 
and  price  changes  were  within  ^  cent  limit,   the  closing  being  %   below   Saturday. 

From  the  statement  given  it  will  appear  that  wheat  has  fallen  more  than 
14  cents  a  bushel  since  the  beginning  of  the  month  in  which  President  Cleveland 
issued  his  call  for  the  extra  session.  The  wheat  crop  for  1892  was  about 
500,000,000  bushels.  A  fall  of  i  cent  in  price  means  a  loss  of  $5,000,000  on  the 
crop  if  those  figures  can  be  taken  for  this  year's  crop.  Calculated  upon 
December  wheat  the  loss  since  June  i  has  been  over  $70,000,000.  or  one-sixth 
of  its  value  at  the  beginning  of  the  decline.  The  fall  of  2  cents  on  yesterday 
alone,  after  the  repeal  bill  passed  the  Senate  and  its  immediate  passage  in  the 
House  was  assured,  amounted  to  $10,000,000.  The  fall  yesterday  in  wheat,  corn, 
and  oats  calculated  upon  a  year's  crop  amounted  to  more  than  $17,000,000.  Are 
these  the  first  fruits  of  repeal?  Wall  street  was  terribly  agitated  at  the  prospect 
of  a  slight  reduction  in  the  gold  reserve.  Will  they  take  notice  of  this  tre- 
mendous reduction  in  the  farmer's  reserve?  The  market  report  above  quoted 
says: 

Yesterday's  vote  by  the  Senate  repealing  the  Sherman  silver  law  did  not  have 
the  effect  on  the  stock  market  that  the  bulls  expected.  In  the  first  place  London 
cabled  orders  to  sell  various  stocks,  much  to  the  disappointment  of  local  operators, 
who  were  confident  that  the  action  of  the  Senate  would  result  In  a  flood  of  buying  orders. 


120  UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL. 

Is  it  possible  that  instead  of  money  flowing  to  us,  it  is  going  to  flow  away 
in  spite  of  repeal?  The  argument  most  persistently  made  by  the  advocates  of 
repeal  was  that  money  would  at  once  flow  to  this  country  from  Europe  and 
relieve  us  of  our  stringency  in  the  money  market.  The  business  centers 
became  impatient  because  the  Senate  insisted  upon  a  thorough  discussion. 
Some  of  the  papers  even  suggested  that  the  Senate  ought  to  be  abolished  because 
it  stood  in  the  way  of  the  restoration  of  confidence.  Finally  the  opposition  was 
worn  out,  the  bill  was  passed,  just  as  the  metropolitan  press  demanded,  and 
behold  it  is  greeted  in  the  market  by  a  general  decline.  We  may  now  expect 
to  hear  that  the  vague,  indefinite,  and  valueless  tail  added  in  the  Senate  as  an 
amendment  has  prevented  returning  confidence,  and  that  it  is  our  highest  duty 
to  repeal  the  caudal  appendage  of  the  Wilson  bill,  just  as  the  repeal  of  the 
purchase  clause  of  the  Sherman  law  was  demanded.  For  twenty  years  we  have 
denounced  the  demonetization  act  of  1873,  and  yet  we  are  now  prepared  with 
our  eyes  open,  fully  conscious  of  what  we  are  doing,  to  perpetrate  the  same 
crime.  We  leave  silver  just  where  it  was  left  then,  except  that  there  was 
provision  then  for  trade  dollars  which  this  bill  does  not  contain.  You  may 
assume  the  responsibility,  I  shall  not. 

The  line  of  battle  is  laid  down.  The  President's  letter  to  Governor 
Northen  expresses  his  opposition  to  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver 
by  this  country  alone.  Upon  that  issue  the  next  Congressional  contest  will 
be  fought  Are  we  dependent  or  independent  as  a  nation?  Shall  we  legislate 
for  ourselves  or  shall  we  beg  some  foreign  nation  to  help  us  provide  for  the 
financial  wants  of  our  own  people? 

We  need  not  fear  the  result  of  such  a  contest.  The  patriotism  of  the 
American  people  is  not  yet  gone,  and  we  can  confidently  await  their  decision. 

I  attempted  to  prevent  a  vote  by  making  dilatory  motions,  not  in  the 
hope  of  preventing  the  passage  of  the  bill  but  for  the  purpose  of  driving 
the  majority  to  secure  repeal  without  any  concession,  real  or  apparent, 
on  the  part  of  the  friends  of  free  silver.  There  were  but  few,  however, 
who  were  willing  to  engage  in  obstruction  and  when  action  could  be  no 
longer  delayed,  I  obtained  the  floor  and  placed  on  record  the  following: 

Final  Protest  Against  Unconditional  RepeaL 

Mr.  Speaker,  when  this  question  came  up  today,  on  the  motion  of  the 
gentleman  from  West  Virginia,  a  demand  for  the  previous  question  was  made 
at  the  time  the  main  question  was  submitted.  There  were  some  of  us  who 
believed  that  those  in  favor  of  the  bill  should  take  all  of  the  responsibility,  and 
provide  all  of  the  means  for  its  passage  through  this  body.  In  our  opinion 
it  is  a  measure  fraught  with  infinite  possibilities  for  mischief  if  not  remedied 
by  subsequent  legislation. 

We  have  believed  it  would  bring  to  this  country  more  of  misery,  as  some 
one  has  said,  "than  war,  pestilence,  and  famine;"  and  feeling  impressed  with 
the  importance  of  the  measure  to  our  people  we  felt  justified  in  exercising  every 
parliamentary  right  given  to  us  under  the  rules  of  the  House  to  prevent  its 
passage.    We  have  seen  those  who  believed  with  us  in  the  Senate  stand  up  for 


UNCONDITIONAL  REPEAL.  121 

two  months  protesting  against  the  passage  of  the  measure  and  in  opposition 
to  what  we  consider  a  crime.  We  saw  them  refusing  within  two  hours  of  the 
time  when  the  vote  was  finally  taken  to  consent  to  allow  a  vote.  We  saw  them 
insisting  that  those  who  favored  the  measure  should  pass  it  without  any 
shadow  of  consent  from  its  opponents. 

This  proceeding  is  not  new.  This  House  has  time  and  again,  on  im- 
portant questions,  seen  the  minority  refuse  to  take  any  part  in  the  proceedings 
or  aid  in  any  manner  to  pass  through  the  House  measures  to  which  they  were 
conscientiously  opposed.  They  have  even  refused  to  vote,  so  that  those  in  favor 
of  the  proposition  might  be  compelled  to  make  a  quorum  of  their  own  mem- 
bers. It  was  our  desire  to  compel  those  in  favor  of  the  bill  to  use  every  means 
in  their  power  to  carry  out  the  purpose  in  view,  so  that  there  should  be  hereafter 
no  chance  for  any  one  to  assert  that  we  had  yielded  one  inch  in  our  opposition 
to  the  measure  and  thereby  permitted  it  to  become  a  law. 

I  made  dilatory  motions  and  intended  to  do  so  until  the  Committee  on 
Rules  brought  in  a  rule,  and  the  House  adopted  it,  making  it  impossible  to 
carry  such  proceedings  any  further.  I  was  on  my  feet,  and  I  thought  in  time, 
to  make  a  dilatory  motion  when  the  demand  for  the  previous  question  was 
submitted  by  the  Chair.  I  found  that  there  were  too  few  of  those  who  were 
opposed  to  the  measure  willing  to  join  in  dilatory  opposition  to  the  extent 
even  of  calling  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Realizing  that  there  are  too  few  of  us  in  the  opposition  who  are  willing 
to  longer  delay  a  vote,  we  believe  it  is  useless  to  carry  our  opposition  further. 
If  I  thought  that  refusing  to  vote  would  compel  the  friends  of  the  measure 
to  bring  a  quorum  here,  and  that  by  so  refusing  I  could  prevent  the  passage  of 
this  bill  or  delay  it,  carrying  out  what  I  believe  to  be  my  duty  to  my 
constituents,  I  would  gladly  refuse  to  vote  and  would  gladly  do  anything  else 
in  my  power  to  prevent  the  perpetration  of  what  I  believe  to  be  a  crime 
against  the  people. 

Having  said  this  much,  Mr.  Speaker,  and  explained  why  I  will  not  carry 
dilatory  tactics  further,  I  simply  desire  to  add,  in  conclusion,  that  if  we  are 
right  in  the  opposition  we  have  made  to  this  bill  time  will  vindicate  the  correct- 
ness of  our  position.  I  hope  that  we  are  wrong.  I  hope  that  the  influences 
back  of  the  measure  are  not  what  we  believe  them  to  be.  I  hope  its  purposes 
are  better  than  we  think  they  are.  I  hope  that  this  legislation  will  be  far  more 
beneficial  to  the  people  of  this  country  than  we  can  believe  it  will  be.  If  we  are 
right,  and  the  bill  now  about  to  be  passed  produces  the  misfortunes  which  we 
believe  will  follow  its  enactment,  I  warn  the  people  responsible  for  its  passage 
that  there  will  be  a  day  of  reckoning. 

You  may  think  that  you  have  buried  the  cause  of  bimetallism;  you  may 
congratulate  yourselves  that  you  have  laid  the  free  coinage  of  silver  away  in  a 
sepulchre,  newly  made  since  the  election,  and  before  the  door  rolled  the  veto 
stone.  But,  sirs,  if  our  cause  is  just,  as  I  believe  it  is,  your  labor  has  been  in 
vain;  no  tomb  was  ever  made  so  strong  that  it  could  imprison  a  righteous  cause. 
Silver  will  lay  aside  its  grave  clothes  and  its  shroud.  It  will  yet  rise  and  in 
its  rising  and  its  reign  will  bless  mankind. 


CHAPTER  III. 


BOLTING   DISCUSSED. 

WHILE  the  repeal  bin  was  under  discussion  in  the  Senate,  I 
visited  Nebraska  as  a  delegate  to  the  Democratic  State  Con- 
vention which  met  at  Lincoln  on  the  4th  of  October,  1893. 
Outside  of  my  own  District  (nearly  every  county  of  which  sent  silver 
delegates)  no  organized  fight  was  made  by  the  silver  Democrats  to  con- 
trol the  Convention  and  when  I  reached  Lincoln  I  found  a  large  ma- 
jority of  the  Convention  favorable  to  the  President's  financial  policy. 
Not  only  was  there  a  strong  majority  in  favor  of  the  President's  policy, 
but  nearly,  if  not  quite,  half  of  the  delegates  to  the  Convention  were 
willing  to  assist  the  President  in  carrying  out  his  policy  to  the  extent 
of  filling  Nebraska's  quota  of  the  Federal  offices.  I  was  selected  by  the 
delegates  from  my  own  District  as  their  member  of  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions,  but  the  chairman  of  the  Convention,  Hon,  T.  J.  Mahoney 
of  Omaha,  then  a  candidate  for  United  States  District  Attorney,  in 
deference  to  the  wishes  of  the  Administration  Democrats,  refused  to 
appoint  me.  One  silver  Democrat,  Mr.  Robert  Clegg,  was  made  a 
member  of  the  Committee,  however,  and  presented  the  following  mi- 
nority plank  on  the  silver  question : 

We  are  opposed  to  the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  and  de- 
mand that  the  repealing  act  shall  carry  out  the  remainder  of  the  plank  in  the 
National  Democratic  platform  of  1892  and  provide  for  the  "coinage  of  both  gold 
and  silver  without  discrimination  against  either  metal  or  charge  for  mintage." 

By  courtesy  of  Mr.  Clegg  I  obtained  the  floor  and  spoke  against 
the  majority  platform. 

The  silver  plank  was  defeated  by  a  large  majority  and  the  gold 
Democrats  were  so  delighted  with  their  victory  that  Messrs.  Euclid 
Martin,  W.  D.  McHugh  and  three  others  joined  in  a  telegram  to  Sec- 
retary Morton  notifying  him  of  the  resolutions  passed  and  sending 
greeting  to  the  President.  Mr.  Cleveland  has  since  appointed  Mr. 
Martin  postmaster  at  Omaha  and  Mr.  McHugh  United  States  Judge 
for  the  District  of  Nebraska. 

Since  the  gold  standard  Democrats  have  referred  to  my  convention 
speech  as  an  abandonment  of  the  Democratic  party,  I  reproduce  the 
criticised  portion  of  it  from  the  columns  of  the  Lincoln  Weekly  Herald 
of  that  date; 

122 


BOLTING  DISCUSSED.  123 

Mr.  Chairman  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  We  are  confronted  to- 
night by  as  important  a  question  as  ever  came  before  the  Democracy  of  the 
State  of  Nebraska.  It  is  not  a  personal  question,  it  is  a  question  which  rises 
above  individuals.  So  far  as  I  am  personally  concerned,  it  matters  nothing 
whether  you  vote  this  amendment  up  or  down;  it  matters  not  to  me  whether  you 
pass  resolutions  censuring  my  course  or  endorsing  it.  If  I  am  wrong  in  the 
position  I  have  taken  on  this  great  financial  question,  I  shall  fall,  though  you 
heap  your  praises  upon  me;  if  I  am  right,  and  in  my  heart,  so  help  me  God, 
I  believe  I  am,  I  shall  triumph  yet,  although  you  condemn  me  in  your  conven- 
tion a  hundred  times.  Gentlemen,  you  are  playing  in  the  basement  of  politics 
— there  is  a  higher  plane.  You  cannot  settle  the  great  political  questions  in  this 
way.  You  think  you  can  pass  resolutions  censuring  a  man  and  that  you  can 
humiliate  him.  I  want  to  tell  you  that  I  shall  still  "more  true  joy  in  exile  feel" 
than  those  delegates  who  are  afraid  to  vote  their  own  sentiments  or  represent 
the  wishes  of  the  people,  lest  they  may  not  get  a  federal  office.  Gentlemen,  I 
know  not  what  others  may  do,  but  duty  to  country  is  above  duty  to  party,  and 
if  you  represent  your  constituents  in  what  you  have  done  and  will  do — for 
I  do  not  entertain  the  fond  hope  that  you  who  have  voted  as  you  have  today 
will  change  upon  this  vote — if  you  as  delegates  properly  reflect  the  sentiment 
of  the  Democratic  party  which  sent  you  here;  if  the  resolutions  which  have 
been  proposed  and  which  you  will  adopt,  express  the  sentiments  of  the  party 
in  this  State;  if  the  party  declares  in  favor  of  a  gold  standard,  as  you  will  if 
you  pass  this  resolution;  if  you  declare  in  favor  of  the  impoverishment  of  the 
people  of  Nebraska;  if  you  intend  to  make  more  galling  than  the  slavery 
of  the  blacks,  the  slavery  of  the  debtors  of  this  country;  if  the  Democratic 
party,  after  you  go  home,  endorses  your  action  and  makes  your  position  its 
permanent  policy,  I  promise  you  that  I  will  go  out  and  serve  my  country 
and  my  God  under  some  other  name,  even  if  I  must  go  alone. 

But,  gentlemen,  I  desire  to  express  it  as  my  humble  opinion  that  the 
Democratic  party  of  Nebraska  will  never  ratify  what  you  have  done  here  in  this 
convention.  In  this  city,  when  we  had  our  primaries,  there  were  bankers 
who  called  sons  of  their  debtors  in  and  told  them  how  they  must  vote,  but 
there  are  too  many  men  in  Nebraska  who  cannot  be  driven  or  compelled  to 
vote  as  somebody  else  dictates. 

The  Democratic  party  was  founded  by  Thomas  Jefferson,  and  Thomas 
Jefferson  dared  to  defy  the  wealth  and  power  of  his  day  and  plead  the  cause 
of  the  common  people,  and  if  the  Democratic  party  is  to  live  it  must  still 
plead  the  cause  of  the  man  who  wears  a  colored  shirt  as  well  as  the  man  who 
wears  a  linen  collar.  You  must  choose  today  what  kind  of  democracy  you 
want.  For  twenty  years  the  party  has  denounced  the  demonetization  of  silver; 
for  twenty  years  it  has  proclaimed  it  the  "crime  of  the  age;"  it  has  heaped  upon 
the  Republican  party  all  the  opprobrium  that  language  could  express  because 
of  its  connection  with  demonetization;  if  you  are  ready  to  go  down  on  your 
knees  and  apologize  for  what  you  have  said,  you  will  go  without  me.  On  the 
14th  day  of  July,  1892,  Senator  Sherman,  of  Ohio,  introduced  in  the  Senate 
of  the  United  States  a  bill  substantially  like  the  Wilson  bill  as  it  passed  the 
House.  Mr.  Sherman  is  the  premier  of  the  Republican  party,  their  leader  upon 
financial  questions,  and  you  come  into  this  convention  and  attempt  to  thrust  his 


124  BOLTING  DISCUSSED. 

bill  down  the  throats  of  Democrats  as  a  Democratic  measure.  There  sits  in 
Columbus,  in  the  State  of  Ohio,  one  long  known  as  "the  noblest  Roman  of 
them  all."  He  has  won  and  held  the  aflfection  of  the  American  people  as  few 
citizens  have  done;  in  the  evening  of  life,  crowned  with  a  nation's  grati- 
tude, he  awaits  the  summons  that  will  call  him  home — where  I  know  there  is 
a  reward  for  men  who  sacrifice  for  their  country's  good — and  from  the  solitude 
of  his  retreat  Allen  G.  Thurman  says  that  he  is  opposed  to  unconditional  re- 
peal, and  when  I  must  choose  between  Senator  Sherman,  of  Ohio,  and  Allen 
G.  Thurman,  of  Ohio,  I  shall  take  my  democracy  from  the  latter. 

Do  you  say  that  this  is  Democracy?  Was  it  in  the  national  platform? 
Read  the  platform.  Can  you  find  authority  for  unconditional  repeal  there? 
You  find  a  demand  for  a  repeal,  but  you  find  a  matter  far  more  important  than 
a  "cowardly  make-shift,"  you  find  a  demand  that  we  shall  coin  both  "gold 
and  silver  without  discrimination  against  either  metal  or  charge  for  mintage." 
Are  you  going  to  snatch  away  a  fragment  of  the  platform  and  call  that  Demo- 
cratic, while  you  turn  your  backs  upon  the  declarations  which  have  been  in 
our  platforms  for  the  last  twenty  years?  The  Democratic  party  in  Congress  has 
on  many  occasions  expressed  itself  and  until  this  year  there  was  never  a  time 
but  that  a  majority  of  the  Democrats  in  both  House  and  Senate  voted  for  the 
free  coinage  of  silver  at  i6  to  i  by  this  country  alone,  and  in  this  Congress,  when 
the  question  came  up  in  the  House,  a  majority  of  the  Democrats  voted  to  sub- 
stitute the  Bland  law  for  the  Sherman  law,  showing  that  they  were  not  in  favor 
of  unconditional  repeal.  If  they  had  favored  unconditional  repeal,  would  they 
have  voted  to  continue  the  purchase  of  silver,  as  provided  by  the  Bland  act? 

In  that  speech  I  took  the  position  which  I  have  announced  since  on 
several  occasions,  namely,  that  I  would  not  support  for  the  Presidency 
an  advocate  of  the  gold  standard.  On  the  26th  of  February,  1896,  the 
Omaha  World-Herald  published  an  editorial  written  by  me  which 
covers  this  subject  and  I  reproduce  it  for  the  purpose  of  setting  forth 
my  vi6ws,  and  for  the  further  purpose  of  pointing  out  that  the  subse- 
quent action  of  the  gold  standard  Democrats  was  expected  and 
counted  upon.  I  have  omitted  the  name  of  the  paper  referred  to  in  the 
editorial  because  its  side  of  the  controversy  is  not  given. 

The  Philosophy  of  Bolting. 

The  is   very   much   agitated  at  the  thought   that   some   Democrats 

may  refuse  to  vote  for  the  Chicago  nominee,  and  it  alternately  castigates 
Secretary  Carlisle  for  refusing  to  aid  Senator  Blackburn  and  silver  Demo- 
crats, whom  it  accuses  of  an  unwillingness  to  support  a  goldbug  for 
President.  It  gives  more  space  to  criticisms  and  warnings  than  it  does 
to  an  intelligent  eflfort  to  remove  the  cause  of  danger.  We  have  reached 
a  time  when  calm  discussion  will  avail  more  than  crimination  and  recrim- 
ination, and  the  World-Herald  invites  its  esteemed  contemporary  to  dis- 
cuss this  question:  "Is  bolting  ever  justifiable,  and  if  so,  when?"  The 
World-Herald  holds  that  the  individual  member  of  a  party  at  all  times  reserves 
the  right  to  vote  against  a  nominee  of  a  party  and  to  abandon  his  party  entirely, 


BOLTING  DISCUSSED.  125 

whenever,  in  his  judgment,  his  duty  to  his  country  requires  it.  He  may 
abandon  the  party  temporarily,  as  for  instance,  when  an  unfit  candidate  is  nomi- 
nated— this  is  recognized  by  the  fact  that  newspapers  and  speakers  discuss  the 
character  of  candidates  and  point  out  their  fitness  or  unfitness. 

The  voter  may  abandon  his  party  permanently  either  when  he  himself 
changes  his  opinion  upon  a  paramount  public  question  or  when  his  party 
changes  its  position.  The  strength  of  party  organization  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  men  do  not  like  to  repudiate  a  nominee  or  leave  their  party  for  light  and 
trivial  causes;  in  fact,  the  tendency  to  vote  a  straight  ticket  is  so  great  that 
men  require  the  strongest  of  reasons  to  justify  desertions,  and  yet  the  right  to 
bolt  or  abandon  is  essential  unless  man  is  to  become  a  mere  machine  and  unless 
the  party  machine  is  to  become  omnipotent.  The  desire  to  draw  voters  to  the 
party  makes  the  party  careful  to  indorse  the  wisest  policies,  and  the  fear  that 
men  may  bolt  is  the  most  effective  protection  against  bad  nominations.  Web- 
ster defines  a  party  as:  "A  number  of  persons  united  in  opinion,  as  opposed  to 
the  rest  of  the  community  or  association,  and  aiming  to  influence  or  control  the 
general  action."  Agreement  in  opinion  is  the  essential  thing;  who  would. define 
a  party  as  "a  number  of  persons  differing  in  opinion,  but  united  in  an  effort 
to  secure  the  offices?"  The  reason  why  abandonment  of  party  is  not  frequent 
is  found  in  the  fact  that  party  principles  are  generally  permanent  in  character, 
and  therefore  the  members  of  the  party,  agreeing  in  opinion,  work  together  har- 
moniously to  carry  out  those  opinions  in  legislation.  The  fact  that  a  new 
national  platform  is  adopted  every  four  years  is  evidence  that  the  right  of  the 
party  to  change  its  position  on  public  questions  is  universally  recognized,  and  the 
fact  that  a  campaign  is  carried  on  through  the  press  and  upon  the  stump  is 
proof  that  the  right  of  the  voter  to  change  his  party  affiliations  is  also  recog- 
nized. The  party  is  a  means,  not  an  end;  it  has  no  reason  for  existence  except 
as  it  enables  the  citizens  to  secure  good  government.  When  is  a  man  justified 
in  abandoning  his  party?  Obviously,  when  he  satisfies  himself  that  some  other 
party  is  a  better  means  through  which  to  serve  his  country. 

If  the  members  of  a  party  agree  upon  the  important  issues,  difference  of 
opinion  on  minor  matters  is  of  little  consequence,  but  difference  of  opinion 
upon  the  questions  that  are  for  the  time  being  paramount,  always  have  destroyed, 
always  will  destroy,  and  always  ought  to  destroy  party  harmony.  It 
may  be  sad  to  contemplate  the  disturbance  of  harmony  or  the  disintegra- 
tion of  a  party,  but  until  human  nature  is  changed  and  our  form  of 
government  abandoned  such  things  must  be  contemplated.  When  the 
tariff  reformer  as  John  G.  Carlisle  refusing  to  aid  a  Democratic  tariff 
gether,  regardless  of  differences  of  opinion  upon  the  money  question;  but 
now  the  money  question  is  paramount,  and  we  see  such  a  Democratic 
tariff  reformer  as  John  G.  Carlisle  refusing  to  aid  a  Democratic  tariff 
reformer  like  Senator  Blackburn  in  his  fight  against  a  Republican  protectionist, 
and  we  see  a  tariff  reformer  like  Grover  Cleveland  carrying  out  the  financial 
policy  of  a  protectionist  like  John  Sherman.  Can  a  national  convention  har- 
monize the  discordant  elements  of  the  Democratic  party?  Impossible.  Sup- 
pose the  advocates  of  bimetallism  control  the  national  convention  and  nominate 
a  free  silver  Democrat  upon  a  free  coinage  platform,  will  Cleveland,  Carlisle, 
Olney,  Morton,  et  al.  support  the  ticket?     Of  course  not.     They  say  the  free 


126  BOLTING  DISCUSSED. 

coinage  of  silver  means  individual  dishonesty,  commercial  disaster  and  national 
dishonor,  and  if  they  believe  what  they  say,  they  ought  not  to  support  the 
ticket,  because  their  duty  to  their  country  is  higher  than  their  duty  to  their 
party  organization.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  convention  nominates  a  gold 
standard  Democrat  on  a  platform  indorsing  the  gold  standard,  gold  bonds,  and 
national  bank  currency,  should  the  nominee  be  supported  by  those  who  believe 
the  gold  standard  to  be  a  conspiracy  of  the  capitalistic  classes  against  the  pro- 
ducers of  wealth — a  crime  against  mankind?  Who  says  that  they  should? 
If  to  continue  Mr.  Cleveland's  financial  policy  is  to  declare  war  against  the 
common  people,  what  friend  of  the  common  people  would  be  willing  to  enlist 
in  such    a  warfare,  even  at  the  command  of  his  party? 

There  is  no  compromise  between  monometallism  and  bimetallism;  there  is 
no  middle  ground  between  the  issue  of  all  paper  money  by  the  government  and 
the  issue  of  all  paper  money  by  the  banks.  There  may  have  been  a  time  when 
compromise  was  possible,  but  the  question  is  now  before  the  people  and  it  must 
be  settled  one  way  or  the  other.  If  the  question  was  an  unimportant  one  it 
might  be  settled  within  the  party  and  the  decision  acquiesced  in;  but  it  is  a 
question  that  touches  every  man,  woman  and  child  in  the  nation,  a  question 
of  right  or  wrong,  a  question  of  justice  or  injustice,  a  question  of  freedom 

or   slavery.     Will   the  advise   its   readers   to   silence  their  conscience, 

close  their  ears  to  cries  of  distress  and  their  eyes  to  a  misery  greater  than  "war, 
pestilence,  and  famine"  have  wrought,  and  vote  the  ticket  straight  if  the 
goldbugs  control  the  convention? 

It  does  not  dare  to  give  that  advice  if  it  has  any  interest  in  the  welfare 
of  its  readers.  The  Democratic  party  cannot  serve  God  and  Mammon;  it  can- 
not serve  plutocracy  and  at  the  same  time  defend  the  rights  of  the  masses. 
If  it  yields  to  the  plutocracy  it  ought  to  lose,  and  it  will  lose  the  support  of 
the  masses;  if  it  espouses  the  cause  of  the  people  it  cannot  expect  either  con- 
tributions or  votes  from  the  capitalistic  classes  and  from  the  great  corporations. 
If  the  gold  standard  Democrats  control  the  national  convention  they  will 
determine  the  policy  of  the  Democratic  party  on  all  questions.  Will  they  give 
the  people  relief  from  corporate  aggression  and  from  the  oppression  of  trusts? 
Will  they  make  this  a  government  "of  the  people,  by  the  people  and  for  the 
people?"  The knows  that  the  gold  standard  Democrats,  instead  of  afford- 
ing the  people  needed  relief,  would  simply  carry  on  the  Government  according 
to  Republicas  ideas.  When  the  Democratic  party  has  gone  down  fighting  for 
the  right  it  has  felt  certain  of  resurrection,  but  what  assurance  has  it  of  rising 
again  if  it  goes  down  fighting  against  the  interest  of  the  masses?  When  the 
spirit  of  Jefferson  leaves  the  Democratic  party  it  will  be  a  corpse. 

If  abandonment  of  party  is  ever  justifiable  the  voter  must  determine  for 
himself  when  the  time  for  abandonment  arrives.  When  should  he  decide?  The 
proper  time,  if  not  the  only  time,  is  after  the  party  has  adopted  its  platform  and 
named  its  candidate.  Until  that  time  he  does  not  know  whether  he  can  rely 
upon  it  to  secure  the  government  which  he  regards  as  good  and  the  legislation 
which  he  considers  necessary.  Does  participation  in  a  primary  or  convention 
bind  the  voter  to  support  a  policy  which  he  considers  ruinous?  If  he  tries, 
through  his  party  organization  to  save  his  country  and  fails,  must  he  then 
take  a  hand  in  its  destruction?    If  a  great  question  arises,  must  he  assume  that 


BOLTING  DISCUSSED.  127 

his  party  will  go  wrong,  and  therefore  leave  it  before  it  acts,  or  should  he  try 
to  hold  his  party  to  the  right  course?  If  a  question  of  supreme  importance 
arises  which  threatens  to  divide  the  party,  have  not  the  majority  a  right  to 
retain  the  party  name  and  organization?  And  how  can  the  majority  be 
determined  unless  all  members  of  the  party  have  a  right  to  take  part  in  the 
decision?  In  some  of  the  Western  States  the  goldbugs  have  insisted  that  silver 
Democrats  should  pledge  themselves  to  support  the  nominee  before  taking  part 
in  the  selection  of  delegates.  If  a  pledge  is  to  be  required,  it  should  be  required  of 
those  who  select  delegates  as  well  as  of  those  who  act  as  delegates;  but 
what  organization  has  a  right  to  require  such  a  pledge? 

A  county  organization  might  require  a  pledge  of  those  who  are  going  to 
vote  upon  a  county  ticket,  and  a  State  organization  might  require  a  pledge  of 
those  who  are  going  to  vote  upon  a  State  ticket,  but  only  a  national  organiza- 
tion can  require  a  pledge  of  those  who  are  going  to  vote  upon  national 
candidates  and  national  questions.  It  would  be  manifestly  unfair  for  Democrats 
of  Missouri  to  be  required  to  give  a  pledge  to  support  the  nominee  of  a  national 
convention  unless  the  same  pledge  is  required  of  the  Democrats  of  Massachu- 
setts. Why  should  the  Democrats  of  the  West  and  South  agree  to  support  the 
nominee  of  a  national  convention  unless  the  Democrats  of  the  northeastern 
States  enter  into  the  same  agreement.  Has  any  Eastern  State  pledged  its 
Democrats  to  vote  for  a  free  silver  candidate  if  nominated?  Of  cpurse  not; 
and  yet  if  election  returns  are  worth  anything,  they  prove  that  Eastern  Demo- 
crats are  more  apt  to  bolt  than  the  Democrats  of  the  South.  The  Eastern 
papers  announce  with  great  emphasis  that  a  free  silver  Democrat  cannot  carry 
an  Eastern  State.  Is  that  not  a  declaration  that  Eastern  Democrats,  after  taking 
part  in  the  selection  of  a  candidate,  will  vote  against  him  if  they  do  not  like 
him?  The  Democratic  party  has  selected  its  candidate  from  New  York  for 
twenty  years  for  the  purpose  of  securing  the  electoral  vote  of  New  York,  and 
yet  some  Western  Democrats  insist  that  the  Democrats  of  the  West  and  South 
are  in  duty  bound  to  support  the  nominee,  regardless  of  his  position  on  the 
money  question,  even  though  the  nominee  may,  if  elected,  destroy  the  value  of 
their  products,  mortgage  their  homes  to  foreign  capitalists  and  lower  the 
standard  of  civilization. 

The  World-Herald  repudiates  such  a  doctrine  and  demands  the  same  liberty, 
the  same  independence,  the  same  political  rights,  for  the  Democrats  of  the 
South  and  West  that  our  Eastern  brethren  have  at  all  times  enjoyed.    Will  the 

enforce  against  its  own  readers  a  doctrine  which  it  has  no  power  to 

enforce  against  the  goldbug  Democrats  of  the  East?  Or  will  it  recognize  the 
right  of  all  Democrats  t«  a  voice  in  the  deliberations  of  the  party,  with  the 
reserved  right  to  abandon  the  party  whenever  the  party  abandons  the  cause 
of  the  people? 


CHAPTER  IV. 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

SOME  weeks  elapsed  after  the  repeal  of  the  purchasing  clause  of  the 
Sherman  Act  before  there  was  any  further  discussion  of  financial 
legislation,  but  in  February  the  seigniorage  bill  was  brought  be- 
fore the  House  and  passed.  I  voted  for  the  measure  and  made  a  speech 
in  support  of  it. 

Notwithstanding  the  seigniora'ge  bill  had  a  considerable  majority  in 
both  Houses,  and  a  still  larger  majority  among  the  Democratic  Repre- 
sentatives in  the  House  and  Senate,  the  President  vetoed  the  measure 
and  thus  thwarted  the  first  effort  put  forth  to  relieve  the  people  from 
the  financial  conditions  which,  already  bad,  were  aggravated  by  the 
repeal  of  the  purchasing  clause  of  the  Sherman  law.  Quite  a  number 
of  the  public  men  who  supported  unconditional  repeal  were  anxious 
to  secure  the  passage  of  the  seigniorage  bill  in  order  to  put  themselves 
in  better  position  before  their  constituents. 

The  last  session  of  the  Fifty-third  Congress  witnessed  a  renewal  of 
the  discussion  of  monetary  topics.  President  Cleveland  presented  to 
Congress  a  plan  for  reforming  the  currency  and  Mr.  Springer  of 
Illinois,  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Banking  and  Currency,  intro- 
duced the  Administration  measure.  This  bill  had  for  its  object  the 
withdrawal  of  a  portion  of  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  and  the 
extension  of  the  national  bank  system.  I  opposed  it  in  a  speech  of 
considerable  length. 

The  bill  failed  of  passage  and  the  President  then  recommended  the 
retirement  of  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  with  an  issue  of  gold 
bonds.  Mr.  Springer  prepared  and  brought  forward  a  measure  carry- 
ing out  the  recommendation.  Mr.  Reed,  on  the  part  of  the  Republi- 
cans, proposed  a  substitute  which  authorized  the  issue  of  low  rate  bonds 
payable  in  coin.  I  offered  the  following  amendment  to  Mr.  Reed's 
substitute : 

Provided,  That  nothing  herein  shall  be  construed  as  surrendering  the  right 
of  the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  pay  all  coin  bonds  outstanding  in 
gold  or  silver  coin  at  the  option  of  the  Government,  as  declared  by  the  fol- 
lowing joint  resolution,  adopted  in  1878  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  United  States  of  America,  to  wit: 

128 


bkVAN  RESIDEiNi.1.,  lial^u.-n,  .nEB. 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS.  131 

"That  all  the  bonds  of  the  United  States  issued  or  authorized  to  be  issued 
under  the  said  act  of  Congress  hereinbefore  recited  are  payable,  principal  and 
interest,  at  the  option  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  in  silver  dollars 
of  the  coinage  of  the  United  States,  containing  412;/^  grains  each  of  standard 
silver;  and  that  to  restore  to  its  coinage  such  silver  coins  as  a  legal  tender  in 
payment  of  said  bonds,  principal  and  interest,  is  not  in  violation  of  the  public 
faith  nor  in  derogation  of  the  rights  of  the  public  creditor." 

My  amendment  was  voi:ed  down  without  discussion,  then  Mr. 
Reed's  substitute  was  rejected  and  Mr.  Springer's  bill  defeated.  Imme- 
diately after  the  defeat  of  the  gold  bond  proposition  the  President 
entered  into  the  Rothschild-Morgan  contract  and  notified  Congress  in 
a  special  message  that  he  had  made  the  contract  and  at  the  same  time 
called  attention  to  the  fact  that  he  had  reserved  the  right  to  substitute 
gold  bonds  at  a  lower  rate  of  interest,  and  asked  authority  for  the  issue 
of  such  bonds.  The  Ways  and  Means  Committee  reported  a  bill  grant- 
ing to  the  President  the  authority  for  which  he  asked.  To  me  fell 
the  honor  of  preparing  a  minority  report  against  this  bill.  Hon. 
Justin  R.  Whiting  joined  in  the  report;  the  other  members  of  the 
minority  explaining  their  positions  upon  the  floor  in  the  course  of  the 
debate.  I  give  below  the  minority  report  and  also  a  copy  of  the  con- 
tract which  gave  rise  to  the  discussion : 

The  Minority  Report* 

Owing  to  the  limited  time  allowed  for  preparing  a  report  (it  being  neces- 
sary to  file  the  report  within  a  few  hours  after  the  bill  was  agreed  upon)  the 
undersigned  dissenting  members  of  the  committee  are  precluded  from  pre- 
senting their  views  with  that  elaboration  which  the  importance  of  the  subject 
would  otherwise  justify;  but  they  beg  to  state  briefly  the  most  important  reason 
which  leads  them  to  disapprove  of  the  measure  recommended  by  the  majority 
of  the  committee. 

First.  The  issue  of  bonds  of  any  kind  is  only  needed  to  replenish  the  gold 
reserve;  and  the  gold  reserve  only  needs  replenishing  because  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  redeems  United  States  notes  and  Treasury  notes  in  the  kind  of 
coins  selected  by  the  note  holder.  The  note  holder  has  no  legal  right  to  choose 
the  coin  in  which  the  obligation  shall  be  redeemed,  but  has  been  permitted 
to  exercise  that  right  by  a  policy  inaugurated  by  the  Treasury  Department  at  or 
soon  after  the  date  of  the  resumption  of  specie  payment.  The  opinion  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Mr.  Carlisle,  recently  given,  is  clear  upon  this 
point.  On  the  21st  of  January,  1895,  a  statement  was  made  before  the  House 
Committee  on  Appropriations  by  Secretary  Carlisle,  in  a  printed  report  of 
which  will  be  found  the  following  question  and  answer: 

"Mr.  Sibley.  I  would  like  to  ask  you  (perhaps  not  entirely  connected  with 
the  matter  under  discussion)  what  objection  there  could  be  to  having  the  option 
of  redeeming  either  in  silver  or  gold  lie  with  the  Treasury  instead  of  the  note 
holder? 


132  SEIGNIORAGE.  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

"Secretary  Carlisle.  If  that  policy  had  been  adopted  at  the  beginning  of 
resumption — and  I  am  not  saying  this  for  the  purpose  of  criticising  the  action 
of  any  of  my  predecessors,  or  anybody  else — but  if  the  policy  of  reserving  to 
the  Government,  at  the  beginning  of  resumption,  the  option  of  redeeming  in 
gold  or  silver  all  its  paper  presented,  I  believe  it  would  have  worked  beneficially, 
and  there  would  have  been  no  trouble  growing  out  of  it,  but  the  Secretaries  of 
the  Treasury  from  the  beginning  of  resumption  have  pursued  a  policy  of 
redeeming  in  gold  or  silver  at  the  option  of  the  holder  of  the  paper,  and 
if  any  Secretary  had  afterwards  attempted  to  change  that  policy  and  force 
silver  upon  a  man  who  wanted  gold,  or  gold  upon  a  man  who  wanted  silver, 
and  especially  if  he  had  made  that  attempt  at  such  a  critical  period  as  we 
have  had  in  the  last  two  years,  my  judgment  is,  it  would  have  been  very 
disastrous.  There  is  a  vast  difference  between  establishing  a  policy  at  the 
beginning,  and  reversing  a  policy  after  it  has  been  long  established,  and  espe- 
cially after  the  situation  has  been  changed." 

No  one  contends  that  the  executive  department  of  the  Government  can 
bind  the  Government  or  pledge  its  faith  and  credit  by  the  adoption  of  such 
a  policy.  To  so  hold  would  be  to  assert  that  the  Executive  can  make  and  re- 
peal laws  without  the  concurrence  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representa- 
tives. Believing  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  has  now  by  law  the 
right  to  redeem  legal  tender  notes  by  the  payment  of  either  gold  or  silver  coin, 
whichever  is  most  convenient  for  the  Government;  and  believing  that  the 
exercise  of  this  discretion  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  absolutely  neces- 
sary to  protect  the  Government  from  organized  and  unorganized  raids  upon 
the  coin  reserve,  we  are  not  willing  to  indorse,  directly  or  by  implica- 
tion, the  administrative  policy  which  has  precipitated  the  present  financial 
conditions.  Neither  are  we  willing,  by  authorizing  bonds  for  the  purchase  of 
gold,  to  pledge  the  Government  to  a  policy  which  discriminates  against 
silver  as  a  standard  money  and  recognizes  gold  as  the  only  money  of  ulti- 
mate redemption.  So  long  as  the  note  holder  is  allowed  to  choose  the  coin 
in  which  he  is  to  be  paid,  so  long  will  it  be  futile  to  attempt  to  maintain  a 
gold  reserve. 

Recent  experience  shows  that  gold  secured  by  the  issue  of  bonds  is  at  once 
drawn  out  by  those  who  are  interested  in  having  more  bonds  issued,  and  thus 
the  public  debt  is  increased  to  the  detriment  of  the  taxpayer  and  for  the 
benefit  only  of  those  who  desire  a  safe  investment  for  surplus  funds.  We  do 
not  believe  that  any  real  advantage  will  be  gained  by  securing  the  gold 
abroad. 

It  is  urged  that  a  change  of  policy  at  this  time  will  cause  embarrassment. 
If  that  be  true  the  blame  must  be  borne  by  those  who  first  inaugurated  the 
policy  and  by  those  who  have  adhered  to  it  in  spite  of  the  clear  intent  and 
letter  of  the  law.  We  have  only  to  consider  whether  it  is  wiser  to  resume  an 
exercise  of  rights  preserved  by  existing  laws  or  to  aggravate  our  present 
difficulties  by  delaying  relief  and  entering  upon  new  experiments.  We  have 
no  hesitation  in  declaring  it  as  our  conviction  that  there  is  no  remedy,  per- 
manent in  character  or  promising  in  results,  except  an  immediate  exercise  by 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  of  the  right  to  redeem  United  States  notes  and 
Treasury  notes  in  standard  silver  coin  whenever  it  is  more  convenient  for  the 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS.  133 

Government  to  do  so,  and  we  further  believe  that  the  greatest  dangers  which 
can  possibly  attend  such  a  course  are  infinitely  less  than  the  evils  which  are 
certain  to  follow  an  adherence  to  the  present  policy. 

Second.  If  we  were  willing  to  authorize  the  issue  of  bonds  at  this  time  to 
purchase  gold,  we  would  still  be  opposed  to  bonds  payable  specifically  in  gold, 
because  an  issue  of  such  bonds  would  either  pledge  the  Government  to  the 
redemption  of  all  obligations  in  gold  or  make  a  discrimination  against  coin 
obligations  now  outstanding.  There  is  no  question  that  the  issue  of  gold 
bonds  now  would  at  once  be  followed  by  a  demand  for  an  act  making  existing 
bonds  payable  in  gold,  and  it  would  be  urged  that  it  would  be  disastrous  to 
depart  from  the  policy  of  gold  bonds  when  once  inaugurated,  just  as  it  is  now 
urged  that  it  will  be  disastrous  for  the  Government  to  resume  a  discretion 
which  has  been  temporarily  surrendered  to  the  note  holder. 

It  is  impossible  to  overestimate  the  evil  influence  which  would  be  exerted 
by  the  issue  of  gold  bonds  by  the  Government,  because  such  action  would 
naturally  and  necessarily  encourage  if  not  actually  compel  the  issue  of  gold 
bonds  by  all  public  and  private  corporations  and  the  making  of  gold  contracts 
by  individuals  generally.  Such  an  increased  strain  upon  gold  would  manifest 
itself  in  a  further  rise  in  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar  and  in  a  further 
and  distressing  addition  to  the  load  of  debt  now  borne  by  the  people. 

Third.  If  we  were  in  favor  of  an  issue  of  gold  bonds  we  would  still  be  op- 
posed to  the  issue  of  bonds  running  for  thirty  years.  According  to  the 
terms  of  the  contract  the  bond  purchasers  agree  to  accept  3  per  cent  gold  bonds 
without  mentioning  the  date  of  payment,  but  it  can  not  be  doubted  that  the 
purchasers  will  insist  upon  a  thirty-year  bond  if  discretion  is  given  to  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  issue  such  a  bond. 

Fourth.  If  we  were  willing  to  authorize  the  issue  of  thirty-year  gold  bonds 
we  would  still  be  opposed  to  recognizing  or  ratifying  a  contract  as  harsh  in 
its  terms  and  as  imperious  in  its  demands  as  the  contract  insisted  upon  by 
the  bond  purchasers. 

Fifth.  If  we  were  willing  to  approve  of  such  a  contract  under  ordinary 
circumstances  we  would  still  be  opposed  to  approving  it  when  made  by  a  sov- 
ereign government  with  foreign  financiers  under  circumstances  which  sug- 
gest a  desire  upon  the  part  of  the  subjects  of  another  country  to  purchase  a 
change  in  the  financial  policy  of  this  nation  for  a  sum  stated. 

These  are  some  of  the  reasons  which  lead  us  to  withhold  our  support  from 
the  measure  recommended  by  a  majority  of  the  committee,  and  they  are,  in 
our  judgment,  sufficient  to  justify  our  dissent.  If  further  reasons  were 
necessary  they  might  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  contract  provides  for  the 
sale  of  coin  bonds  at  about  104H.  which  would  sell  in  the  market  at  about  119; 
in  the  fact  that  the  contract  agrees  to  sell  thirty-year  gold  bonds,  drawing  3  per 
cent  interest,  for  less  than  the  Government  three  months  ago  sold  twelve- 
year  coin  bonds,  and  in  the  additional  fact  that  foreign  investors  are  by  the 
contract  given  a  preference  over  American  investors  in  the  purchase  of  any 
bonds  which  may  be  issued  before  next  October,  and  are  also  given  a  pref- 
erence now  over  the  American  investors  who  but  a  short  time  ago  stood 
ready  to  purchase  more  bonds  than  were  then  offered. 

WILLIAM  J.  BRYAN. 
JUSTIN  R.  WHITING. 


134  SEIGNIORAGE.  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

Roibschild-Morgan  Contract. 

This  agreement  entered  into  this  8th  day  of  February,  1895,  between  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States,  of  the  first  part,  and  Messrs. 
August  Belmont  &  Co.,  of  New  York,  on  behalf  of  Messrs.  N.  M.  Rothschild 
&  Sons,  of  London,  England,  and  themselves,  and  Messrs.  J.  P.  Morgan  & 
Co.,  of  New  York,  on  behalf  of  Messrs.  J.  S.  Morgan  &  Co.,  of  London,  and 
themselves,  parties  of  the  second  part. 

Witnesseth:  Whereas  it  is  provided  by  the  Revised  Statutes  of  the  United 
States  (section  3700)  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  may  purchase  coin 
with  any  of  the  bonds  or  notes  of  the  United  States  authorized  by  law,  at 
such  rates  and  upon  such  terms  as  he  may  deem  most  advantageous  to  the 
public  interests;  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  now  deems  that  an  emer- 
gency exists  in  which  the  public  interests  require  that,  as  hereinafter  pro- 
vided, coin  shall  be  purchased  with  the  bonds  of  the  United  States,  of  the  de- 
scription hereinafter  mentioned,  authorized  to  be  issued  under  the  act  enti- 
tled "An  act  to  provide  for  the  resumption  of  specie  payments,"  approved 
January  14,  1875,  being  bonds  of  the  United  States  described  in  act  of  Con- 
gress approved  July  14,  1870,  entitled  "An  act  to  authorize  the  refunding  of 
the  national  debt." 

Now,  therefore,  the  said  parties  of  the  second  part  hereby  agree  to  sell  and 
deliver  to  the  United  States  3,500,000  ounces  of  standard  gold  coin  of  the 
United  States,  at  the  rate  of  $17.80441  per  ounce,  payable  in  United  States  4 
per  cent,  thirty-year  coupon  or  registered  bonds,  said  bonds  to  be  dated  Feb- 
ruary I,  1895,  and  payable  at  the  pleasure  of  the  United  States  after  thirty 
years  from  date,  issued  under  the  acts  of  Congress  of  July  14,  1870,  January 
20,  1871,  and  January  14,  1875,  bearing  interest  at  the  rate  of  4  per  cent,  per 
annum,  payable  quarterly. 

First.  Such  purchase  and  sale  of  gold  coin  being  made  on  the  following 
conditions: 

1.  At  least  one-half  of  all  coin  deliverable  hereintinder  shall  be  obtained  in 
and  shipped  from  Europe,  but  the  shipments  shall  not  be  required  to  exceed 
300,000  ounces  per  month,  unless  the  parties  of  the  second  part  shall  consent 
thereto. 

2.  All  deliveries  shall  be  made  at  any  of  the  subtreasuries  or  at  any  other 
legal  depository  of  the  United  States. 

3.  All  gold  coins  delivered  shall  be  received  on  the  basis  of  25.8  grains  of 
standard  gold  per  dollar,  if  within  limit  of  tolerance. 

4.  Bonds  delivered  under  this  contract  are  to  be  delivered  free  of  accrued 
interest,  which  is  to  be  assumed  and  paid  by  the  parties  of  the  second  part 
at  the  time  of  their  delivery  to  them. 

Second.  Should  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  desire  to  ofTer  or  sell  any 
bonds  of  the  United  States  on  or  before  the  ist  day  of  October,  1895,  he  shall 
first  offer  the  same  to  the  parties  of  the  second  part;  but  thereafter  he  shall 
be  free  from  every  such  obl'gation  to  the  parties  of  the  second  part. 

Third.  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  hereby  reserves  the  right,  within  ten 
days  from  the  date  hereof,  in  case  he  shall  receive  authority  from  Congress 
therefor,  to  substitute  any  bonds  of  the  United  States,  bearing  3  per  cent,  in- 
terest,  of  which   the  principal   and   interest   shall   be   specifically   payable   in 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS.  135 

United  States  gold  coin  of  the  present  weight  and  fineness  for  the  bonds 
herein  alluded  to;  such  3  per  cent,  bonds  to  be  accepted  by  the  parties  of  the 
second  part  at  par,  i.  e.,  at  $18.60465  per  ounce  of  standard  gold. 

Fourth.  No  bonds  shall  be  delivered  to  the  parties  of  the  second  part,  or 
either  of  them,  except  in  payment  for  coin  from  time  to  time  received  here- 
under; whereupon  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  shall 
and  will  deliver  the  bonds  as  herein  provided,  at  such  places  as  shall  be  desig- 
nated by  the  parties  of  the  second  part.  Any  expense  of  delivery  out  of  the 
United  States  shall  be  assumed  and  paid  by  the  parties  of  the  second  part. 

Fifth.  In  consideration  of  the  purchase  of  su(^h  coin  the  parties  of  the 
second  part,  and  their  associates  hereunder,  assume  and  will  bear  all  the  ex- 
pense and  inevitable  loss  of  bringing  gold  from  Europe  hereunder;  and,  as  far 
as  lies  in  their  power,  will  exert  all  financial  influence  and  will  make  all  legiti- 
mate efforts  to  protect  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  against  the  with- 
drawals of  gold  pending  the  complete  performance  of  this  contract. 

In  witness  whereof  the  parties  hereto  have  hereunto  set  their  hands  in  five 
parts  this  8th  day  of  February,  1895. 

J.  G.  CARLISLE, 

Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 

AUGUST  BELMONT  &  CO., 

On  behalf  of  Messrs.  N.  M.  Rothschild  &  Sons,  London,  and  themselves. 

J.  P.  MORGAN  &  CO., 
On  behalf  of  Messrs.  J.  S.  Morgan  &  Co.,  London,  and  themselves. 
Attest: 

W.   E.   Curtis. 

Francis  Lynde  Stetson. 

I  felt  that  the  issue  of  bonds  payable  specifically  in  gold  would 
establish  a  very  dangerous  precedent,  and  therefore  took  a  deep  interest 
in  the  defeat  of  the  proposition.  I  believed  that  the  issuance  of  gold 
bonds  would  be  followed  by  a  demand  upon  the  part  of  the  bond 
holding  class  for  another  credit  strengthening  act,  like  the  one  passed 
in  1869,  except  that  this  one  would  declare  all  bonds  payable  in  gold. 
On  February  14,  1895,  I  submitted  the  following  argument  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  bill: 

Against  Gold  Bonds, 

The  House  having  under  consideration  the  joint  resolution  (H.  Res.  275)  author- 
izing the  issue  of  $65,U6,275  of  gold  3  per  cent,  bonds. 

Mr.  Speaker:  This  resolution  embodies  two  purposes.  It  proposes  to 
ratify  the  contract  made  by  the  Executive  by  authorizing  the  substitution 
of  gold  bonds  to  the  amount  of  $65,116,275,  bearing  interest  at  a  rate  not 
exceeding  3  per  cent.,  and  payable  not  more  than  thirty  years  after  date, 
in  accordance  with  the  request  made  in  the  President's  message,  and  it 
also  provides  that  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  redeemed  with  the  gold  pur- 
chased with  these  bonds  shall  not  be  re-issued. 

I  desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  House  to  the  fact  that  the  latter  pro- 
vision is  intended  to  lock  up  in  the  Treasury  $65,000,000  of  legal-tender  paper 


136  SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

without  making  any  provision  whatever  to  supply  the  place  of  that  currency. 
If  we  vote  for  this  proposition,  we  vote  to  retire  that  much  money  without 
filling  the  void. 

Mr.  Warner.    Will  the  gentleman  allow  me  to  ask  him  a  question? 

Mr.  Bryan.     I  hope  I  shall  not  be  interrupted. 

Mr.  Warner.     Does  not  the  gold  fill  the  void? 

Mr.  Bryan.  Mr.  Speaker,  the  House  knows  that  when  I  have  time  I  never 
object  to  questions,  and  it  is  only  because  of  my  limited  time  today  that  I  ask 
gentlemen  not  to  interrupt  me.  In  answer  to  the  question,  however,  I  would 
say  that  unless  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  are  reissued  they  will  accu- 
mulate and  a  few  more  bond  issues  will  retire  all  of  them  and  deprive  the  coun- 
try of  that  much  of  its  circulating  medium.  For  all  practical  purposes  it  is 
equivalent  to  a  cancellation  of  this  money  and  will  ofifer  a  constant  temptation 
to  those  who  oppose  greenbacks  to  draw  out  the  gold  and  force  further  issues 
of  bonds  for  the  purpose  of  getting  this  kind  of  money  out  of  the  way. 

But  the  main  question  presented  by  this  resolution  is  whether  we  shall 
ratify  the  contract  made  by  the  Executive  and  issue  gold  bonds  in  order  to 
save  about  a  half  million  a  year  in  interest.  The  supporters  of  this  resolution 
urge  us  to  consider  it  as  a  business  proposition  and  I  shall  discuss  it  as  a  busi- 
ness proposition.  0*ne  gentleman  has  suggested  that  Democrats  ought  not  to 
criticise  the  Administration.  I  want  it  understood  that,  so  far  as  I  am  con- 
cerned, when  I  took  the  oath  of  office  as  a  member  of  Congress,  there  was 
no  mental  reservation  that  I  would  not  speak  out  against  an  outrage  com- 
mitted against  my  constituents,  even  when  committed  by  the  President  of  the 
United  States. 

The  President  of  the  United  States  is  only  a  man.  We  intrust  the  adminis- 
tration of  government  to  men,  and  when  we  do  so,  we  know  that  they  are 
liable  to  err.  When  men  are  in  public  office  we  expect  them  to  make  mis- 
takes— even  so  exalted  an  official  as  the  President  is  liable  to  make  mistakes. 
And  if  the  President  does  make  a  mistake,  what  should  Congress  do?  Ought 
it  to  blindly  approve  his  mistake,  or  do  we  owe  it  to  the  people  of  the  United 
States,  and  even  to  the  President  himself,  to  correct  the  mistake  so  that  it  will 
not  be  made  again?  But  some  gentlemen  say  that  the  Democratic  party  should 
stand  by  the  President.  What  has  he  done  for  the  party  since  the  last  election 
to  earn  its  gratitude?  I  want  to  suggest  to  my  Democratic  friends  that  the 
party  owes  no  great  debt  of  gratitude  to  its  President.  What  gratitude  should 
we  feel?  The  gratitude  which  a  confiding  ward  feels  toward  his  guardian 
without  bond  who  has  squandered  a  rich  estate.  What  gratitude  should  we 
feel?  The  gratitude  which  a  passenger  feels  toward  the  trainman  who  has 
opened  a  switch  and  precipitated  a  wreck.  What  has  he  done  for  the  party? 
He  has  attempted  to  inoculate  it  with  Republican  virus,  and  blood  poisoning 
has  set  in. 

What  is  the  duty  of  the  Democratic  party?  If  it  still  loves  its  President, 
it  is  its  duty,  as  I  understand  it,  to  prove  that  it  has  at  least  one  attribute  of 
divinity  left  by  chastening  him  whom  it  loveth. 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  do  not  intend  to  question  the  motives  of  the  officials  who 
are  responsible  for  this  contract.  We  might  criticise  the  conduct  of  the  Presi- 
dent in  excluding  all  other  advisers  and  consulting  only  with  the  magnates  of 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS.  137 

Wall  street;  and  we  might  even  suggest  that  he  could  no  more  expect  to  escape 
unharmed  from  such  associations  than  one  could  expect  to  escape  asphyxiation 
if  he  locked  himself  up  in  a  room  and  turned  on  the  gas — but  without  ques- 
tioning the  motive  of  the  President,  I  say,  we  have  a  right  to  express  our  judg- 
ment as  to  whether  the  discretion  vested  in  the  President  has  been  wisely  exer- 
cised. We  are  told  that  this  is  not  only  a  business  proposition  but  a  very 
insignificant  question — ^just  a  little  matter  of  saving  half  a  million  a  year,  that 
is   all. 

,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  desire  to  ask  these  gentlemen  who  are  always  coming  here 
with  these  "business  propositions,"  why  it  is  that  no  advocate  of  the  gold 
standard  dares  to  stand  before  the  American  people  and  unfold  the  full  plan 
of  the  gold  conspiracy.  Why  is  it  that  our  opponents  keep  bringing  up  one 
proposition  at  a  time  and  saying,  "An  emergency  is  upon  us;  let  us  adopt  this 
proposition  at  once  and  leave  the  final  settlement  of  the  money  question  until 
some  other  time?"  Why  is  it  that  we  never  reach  a  time  when  these  gentlemen 
are  willing  to  consider  the  greatest  of  all  the  questions  which  are  demanding 
settlement  at  the  hands  of  the  American  people?  Save  $16,000,000  in  thirty 
years?    Why,  sirs,  this  is  a  bigger  question  than  $16,000,000. 

Will  you  set  a  price  upon  human  life?  Will  you  weigh  in  the  balance  the 
misery  of  the  people?  What  is  the  value  of  civilization  to  the  human  race — 
because  the  settlement  of  this  "little  question"  may  enormously  affect  the  wel- 
fare of  mankind.  And  yet,  gentlemen  talk  about  its  being  a  matter  of  small 
consequence,  a  little  question,  the  mere  saving  of  half  a  million  dollars  a  year. 
Save  the  people  $16,000,000  in  thirty  years — twenty-five  cents  apiece — by  this 
resolution  and  $16,000,000,000  will  not  measure  the  damage  which  may  result 
to  them  in  a  third  of  that  time. 

What  is  this  contract?  I  am  glad  that  it  has  been  made  public.  It  is  a 
contract  made  by  the  Executive  of  a  great  nation  with  the  representatives  of 
foreign  money  loaners.  It  is  a  contract  made  with  men  who  are  desirous  of 
changing  the  financial  policy  of  this  country.  They  recognize  by  their  actions 
that  the  United  States  has  the  right  to  pay  coin  obligations  in  either  gold  or 
silver  and  they  come  to  us  with  the  insolent  proposition,  "we  will  give  you 
$16,000,000,  paying  a  proportionate  amount  each  year,  if  the  United  States  will 
change  its  financial  policy  to  suit  us."  Never  before  has  such  a  bribe  been 
offered  to  our  people  by  a  foreign  syndicate,  and  we  ought  to  so  act  that  such  a 
bribe  will  never  be  offered  again.  By  this  contract  we  not  only  negotiate  with 
foreigners  for  a  change  in  our  financial  policy  but  give  them  an  option  on 
future  loans.  They  are  to  have  the  option  on  all  bonds  which  may  be  issued 
before  the  first  of  next  October. 

What  would  be  the  effect  of  such  a  condition?  Do  you  suppose  that  any- 
body else  will  care  to  bid  when  it  is  known  that  these  men  have  the  refusal 
of  all  bonds  at  any  price?  It  makes  a  popular  loan  impossible.  If  these  men 
alone  bid  for  the  next  issue  they  can  insist  upon  a  condition  that  they  shall 
have  an  option  on  a  still  further  issue  of  bonds.  Shall  we  bind  ourselves  to 
these  men  perpetually?  I  shall  not  raise  the  question,  because  I  am  not  pre- 
pared to  discuss  it  from  a  legal  standpoint,  whether  the  President  has  a  right 
to  sell  an  option  on  bonds  which  may  be  hereafter  issued,  but,  sirs,  I  will  say 
that,  if  he  has  the  right,  I  believe  he  has  made  an  inexcusable  use  of  the  discre- 


138  SEIGNIORAGE.  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

tion  vested  in  him.     We  cannot  afford  to  put  ourselves  in  the  hands  of  the 
Rothschilds,  who  hold  mortgages  on  most  of  the  thrones  of  Europe. 

The  press  dispatches  stated  that  the  French  steamer,  La  Gascogne.  when 
she  came  into  port  a  few  days  ago,  had  three  red  lanterns  on  her  foremast. 
signifying:  "Get  out  of  the  way,  I  cannot  control  my  course."  The  President 
may  be  persuaded  that  this  country  has  reached  a  point  where  it  cannot  control 
its  own  course  and  must  supplicate  foreign  financiers  to  protect  our  treasury, 
but  he  mistakes  the  sentiment  of  the  American  people  if  he  thinks  that  they 
share  with  him  in  this  alarm.  The  United  States  is  able  to  take  care  of  itself. 
It  can  preserve  its  credit  and  protect  its  people  without  purchasing  at  a  high 
price  the  "financial  influence"  or  the  "legitimate  efforts"  of  banking  corpora- 
tions, foreign  or  domestic. 

I  call  attention  also  to  the  fact  that  these  bonds  may  be  made  payable  in 
thirty  years.  The  contract  does  not  call  for  thirty-year  bonds;  it  says  thai 
"any  bonds  of  the  United  States,"  payable  in  gold,  and  drawing  3  per  cent, 
interest,  may  be  substituted  in  the  place  of  the  coin  bonds.  But  there  seems  to 
be  a  fear  that  the  bond  buyers  may  insist  that  the  spirit  of  the  contract  would 
compel  the  issue  of  thirty-year  bonds.  In  describing  this  contract,  Mr. 
Speaker,  I  find  in  "The  Merchant  of  Venice"  language  more  expressive  than 
any  I  can  command.  That  language  fits  the  contract  which  we  are  asked  to 
ratify,  and  is  as  follows: 

Shy  lock.      This   kindness    will    I    show: 

Go  with  me  to  a  notary,  seal  me  there 
Your  single  bond,  and,  in  a  merry  sport. 

If  you  repay  me  not  on  such  a  day. 
In  such  a  place,   such  sum  or  sums   as  are 
Express'd  in  the  condition,   let  the  forfeit 
Be   nominated   for   an   equal   pound 

Of  your  fair  flesh,  to  be  cut  off  and  taken 
In  what  part  of  your  body  pleaseth  me. 

Antonio.     Yes,  Shylock,   I  will  seal  unto  this  bond. 

Mr.  Bowen.    Who  wrote  that,  Shakespeare  or  Bacon? 

Mr.  Bryan.  I  shall  leave  Mr.  Donnelly  and  Mr.  Ingersoll  to  settle  the 
question  of  authorship.  But,  Mr.  Speaker,  it  was  decided  that  Shylock's  bond, 
while  it  called  for  a  pound  of  flesh,  did  not  include  any  blood.  The  difference 
between  the  construction  placed  upon  that  bond  and  the  construction  which  this 
House  is  asked  to  place  upon  the  contract  before  us  is,  that  we  are  asked  to 
make  the  construction  so  liberal  as  to  include  the  blood  with  the  flesh.  We 
have  a  right,  according  to  the  terms  of  the  contract,  to  substitute  a  short-time 
bond,  and  yet  the  resolution  permits  the  Secretary  to  issue  a  thi;ty-year  bond. 

This  House  is  not  prepared  to  give  its  sanction  to  a  policy  which  con- 
templates a  permanent  public  debt,  but  the  rule  adopted  allows  no  opportunity 
for  an  amendment  limiting  the  bonds  to  five  or  ten  years.  If  we  give  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  authority  to  issue  a  thirty-year  bond,  he  is  powerless 
to  resist  the  demands  of  the  bond  purchasers,  because  the  contract  is  made; 
ten  days  only  are  given  for  the  exercise  of  the  option;  he  can  not  negotiate  with 
anybody  else;  he  can  not  offer  bonds  to  anj'body  else;  he  is  in  their  hands;  he 
must  make  a  thirty-year  bond  if  they  ask  it — and  who  doubts  that  they  will 
ask  it? 


^^^^^r 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS.  141 

There  is  another  objection  to  this  contract.  It  provides  for  the  private  sale 
of  coin  bonds,  running  thirty  years,  at  $1.04^  which  ought  to  be  worth  $1.19  in 
the  open  market,  and  which  could  have  been  sold  at  public  auction  for  $1.15 
without  the  least  effort. 

Why  this  sacrifice  of  the  interest  of  the  United  States?  The  Government's 
credit  was  not  in  danger;  the  bonds  of  the  United  States  were  selling  in  the 
market  every  day  at  a  regular  premium.  The  same  kind  of  bonds,  having  only 
twelve  years  to  run,  were  selling  at  over  $1.12.  What  excuse  was  there  for 
selling  a  thirty-year  bond  for  $1.04^^?  What  defense  can  be  made  for  this  gift 
of  something  like  seven  millions  and  a  half  dollars  to  the  bond  syndicate?  We 
are  told  that  we  can  avoid  the  sale  of  coin  bonds  at  $1.04^/3  by  authorizing  3  per 
cent  gold  bonds.  What  a  privilege!  Why,  it  is  less  than  three  months  since 
ten-year  coin  bonds  were  sold  by  the  President  at  a  premium  which  reduced 
the  rate  of  interest  to  less  than  3  per  cent. 

Has  the  credit  of  the  country  fallen  so  much  in  three  months  that  a 
thirty-year  3  per  cent  gold  bond  is  worth  less  now  than  a  ten-year  3  per  cent 
coin  bond  was  then?  Nothing  has  occurred  within  three  months,  except  the 
President's  messages,  to  injure  the  credit  of  the  country.  If  the  President  is 
correct  in  assuming  that  the  financial  world  places  a  higher  estimate  upon  gold 
bonds  than  upon  coin  bonds,  why  did  he  not  secure  a  higher  price  for  gold 
bonds?  Did  not  purchasers  know  three  months  ago  that  coin  bonds  could  be 
paid  in  silver?  They  certainly  did,  and  yet  they  were  willing  to  loan  money  on 
those  bonds  for  a  short  time  at  a  lower  rate  of  interest  than  Messrs.  Morgan 
and  Rothschild  now  offer  to  loan  on  long-time  gold  bonds. 

But  why  are  gold  bonds  demanded?  Gentlemen  say  that  all  our  bonds  are 
in  fact  payable  in  gold  now.  They  either  are  payable  in  gold  or  they  are  not.  If 
they  are,  then  this  legislation  is  not  needed;  if  they  are  not,  then  the  proposed 
legislation  is  a  radical  and  violent  change  of  policy.  We  insist  that  outstanding 
bonds  are  payable  in  gold  or  silver  and  that  the  United  States  has  the  right  to 
choose  the  coin.  The  men  who  contracted  for  coin  bonds  understood  this,  and 
insisted  upon  a  higher  rate  of  interest  on  the  ground  that  they  might  be  paid 
in  silver.  By  what  authority,  then,  does  the  President  declare  in  his  message: 
"Of  course  there  should  never  be  a  doubt  in  any  quarter  as  to  the  redemption 
in  gold  or  the  bonds  of  the  Government  which  are  made  payable  in  coin." 
Is  he  not  aware  of  the  fact  that  the  debtor  always  has  the  choice  of  the  coin, 
where  only  coin  is  mentioned?  Is  he  not  aware  of  the  adoption  of  the  Matthews 
resolution  in  1878?  That  resolution  expressly  declared  the  right  of  the  Govern- 
ment to  pay  its  bonds  in  either  gold  or  silver.    The  resolution  reads  as  follows: 

That  all  the  bonds  of  the  United  States  Issued  or  authorized  to  be  Issued  under  the 
said  act  of  Congress  hereinbefore  recited  are  payable,  principal  and  interest,  at  the  option  of 
the  Government  of  the  United  States,  in  silver  dollars  of  the  coinage  of  the  United  States, 
containing  412Vi  grains  each  of  standard  silver;  and  that  to  restore  to  its  coinage  such 
silver  coin  as  a  legal  tender  in  payment  of  said  bonds,  principal  and  interest,  Is 
not  in  violation  of  the  public  faith  nor  in  derogation  of  the  rights  of  the  public 
creditors. 

That  policy  has  never  been  changed  by  law,  but  the  resolution  before  us 
makes  a  departure  from  the  settled  policy  of  the  Government  and  provides  for 
a  bond  payable  specifically  in  gold.  Do  members  realize  the  influence  which 
would  be  exerted  upon  the  public  generally  by  the  adoption  of  this  resolution? 

8 


142  SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

Tlie  gentleman  from  Florida  (Mr.  Cooper)  told  us  that  his  city  recently  issued 
gold  bonds  and  we  know  that  pressure  is  being  brought  to  bear  on  other  cities 
and  on  individuals  to  induce  them  to  enter  into  gold  contracts.  If  the  Govern- 
ment discredits  silver  by  making  these  bonds  payable  in  gold  only,  it  will  set 
an  example  which  will  go  far  toward  compelling  all  borrowers  to  promise  pay- 
ment in  gold.  As  gold  contracts  increase  in  number  the  demand  for  gold  will 
increase. 

What  a  farce  for  men  to  talk  about  maintaining  the  parity  between  the 
metals  by  means  of  legislation  which  directly  tends  to  destroy  the  parity  and 
drive  gold  to  a  premium!  The  legislation  proposed  will  either  pledge  the 
Government  to  redeem  all  bonds  in  gold  or  it  will  discredit  bonds  already  in 
existence.  The  probability  is  that  the  adoption  of  this  resolution  would  be 
followed  immediately  by  a  demand  from  the  holders  of  other  bonds  that  they 
be  put  upon  the  same  gold  footing.  I  say  probably;  I  may  say  that  such  a 
course  is  certain.  No  sooner  had  the  President  asked  for  authority  to  issue 
gold  bonds  than  his  faithful  lieutenant  in  the  Senate,  Mr.  Hill,  offered  a  reso- 
lution pledging  the  Government  to  redeem  all  bonds  in  gold  if  gold  goes  to 
a  premium.     This  remarkable  resolution  reads  as  follows: 

Resolved  (if  the  House  of  Representatives  concurs),  That  it  is  the  sense  of  Con- 
gress that  the  true  policy  of  the  Government  requires  that  its  efforts  should  be  steadily 
directed  to  the  establishment  of  a  safe  system  of  bimetallism,  wherein  gold  and  silver 
may  be  maintained  at  a  parity,  and  every  dollar  coined  may  be  the  equal  in  value 
and  power  of  every  other  dollar  coined  or  issued  by  the  United  States;  but  if  our 
efforts  to  establish  or  maintain  such  bimetallism  shall  not  be  wholly  successful,  and  If 
for  any  reason  our  silver  coin  shall  not  hereafter  be  at  parity  with  gold  coin  and 
the  equal  thereof  in  value  and  power  in  the  market  and  in  the  payment  of  debts,  then 
it  is  hereby  declared  that  the  bonds  of  the  United  States  now  or ,  hereafter  issued 
which  by  their  terms  are  payable  in  coin,  shall  nevertheless,  be  paid  in  standard  gold 
dollars,  it  being  the  policy  of  the  United  States  that  its  creditors  shall  at  all  times  be 
paid  in  the  best  money  in  use. 

This  would  not  only  pledge  the  Government  to  the  payment  of  previous 
issues  in  gold  but  would  relieve  the  recent  purchasers  from  the  loss  which  they 
guarded  against  by  an  extortionate  interest  and  yet  leave  them  to  enjoy  the 
fruits  of  their  extortion.  Thus  does  one  vicious  proposition  tread  upon  the 
heels  of  another.  Mr.  Hill's  plan  is  even  worse  than  the  President's,  for  under 
the  plan  of  the  latter,  the  bondholder  would  bear  whatever  loss  might  arise  if 
gold  should  happen  to  fall  below  silver,  but  Mr.  Hill's  plan  burdens  the  Gov- 
ernment with  all  the  risk  and  guarantees  to  the  bondholder  all  the  chance  of 
gain.  Not  only  is  Mr.  Hill's  plan  directly  antagonistic  to  the  principle  of  bi- 
metallism, but  it  offers  a  reward  to  the  creditor  if  he  can  destroy  the  parity 
between  the  metals,  whereas  the  creditor  is  interested  in  maintaining  the  parity 
when  the  option  lies  with  the  Government. 

It  is  alarming  to  note  the  aggressiveness  of  the  creditor  classes,  and 
humiliating  to  think  that  Congress  should  be  asked  to  comply  with  their 
wishes  regardless  of  consequences.  The  first  effect  of  this  movement  in  the 
direction  of  gold  contracts  would  be  to  reduce  the  amount  of  our  primary  money 
and  to  build  our  entire  credit  system  upon  a  narrow  base  of  gold.  Think  of 
making  an  indebtedness,  public  and  private,  of  $13,000,000,000,  payable  in  gold, 
with  only  $600,000,000  of  gold  in  the  country,  and  that  an  estimate! 

The  Government  estimate  of  gold  coin  in  the  United  States  on  the  ist  of 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS.  143 

January,  1895,  was  about  $6oo,ooo,CK)0,  and  of  that  sum  only  about  $214,000,000 
was  visible.  About  $100,000,000  was  in  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States,  and 
$114,000,000  was  held  by  national  banks.  Beyond  that,  no  one  knows  the 
whereabouts  of  any  large  amount  of  this  gold.  We  know  that  no  large  amount 
of  gold  is  in  circulation  among  the  people,  or  in  hiding,  and  yet,  with  only 
$214,000,000  of  visible  gold,  the  United  States  is  expected  to  conduct  a  safe  busi- 
ness on  a  gold  basis.  To  make  the  attempt  is  to  invite  a  panic — nay,  more, 
it  is  to  guarantee  disaster. 

And  yet,  Mr.  Speaker,  if  the  immediate  efTect  is  bad,  the  ultimate  effect 
of  the  proposed  policy  is  infinitely  worse.  Every  act  of  legislation  dis- 
criminating against  silver  gives  an  impetus  to  the  movement  in  favor  of  a  gold 
standard  and  makes  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  more  difificult.  No  one  act 
could,  in  my  judgment,  do  more  to  obstruct  the  re-establishment  of  free 
bimetallic  coinage  as  it  existed  prior  to  1873  than  the  act  which  the  President 
is  attempting  to  force  upon  Congress.  Are  the  gentlemen  who  are  urging 
it  deceived  as  to  its  purpose  and  necessary  effect  when  they  speak  of  it  as  an 
insignificant  matter,  or  do  they  presume  upon  the  credulity  of  their  hearers? 
Believing  that  it  is  a  long  step  in  the  direction  of  universal  gold  monometallism, 
and  believing  that  universal  gold  monometallism  would  bring  to  this  country 
continuous  and  increasing  financial  distress  beyond  the  power  of  language  to 
exaggerate,  we  protest  against  the  passage  of  this  resolution.  If  we  love  our 
country  and  are  interested  in  its  welfare,  no  sacrifice  on  our  part  should  be  too 
great,  if  necessary  to  prevent  the  adoption  of  such  a  policy  by  this,  the  foremost 
nation  upon  the  earth. 

While  the  question  immediately  before  us  is  whether  we  shall  authorize 
the  issue  of  gold  bonds,  I  ask  you  to  consider  for  a  moment  whether  we  need 
to  issue  bonds  of  any  kind.  Bonds  have  been  issued  to  replenish  the  gold 
reserve,  and  the  gold  reserve  has  been  drawn  out  because  the  holders  of  green- 
backs and  Treasury  notes  have  been  allowed  to  designate  the  coin  of  redemption. 
In  other  words,  the  option  which  belongs  to  the  Government  has  been  sur- 
rendered to  the  holders  of  the  notes,  and  this  has  been  done,  not  by  legislative 
enactment,  but  by  an  administrative  policy.  If  the  withdrawal  of  gold  could 
be  stopped  no  bonds  would  be  necessary.  It  becomes  important,  therefore,  to 
know  whether  the  Government  has  a  legal  right  to  protect  itself  from  gold 
grabbing  by  redeeming  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  in  silver  when  silver  is 
more  convenient.  On  the  21st  of  January,  1895,  Secretary  Carlisle  made  a  state- 
ment before  the  House  Committee  on  Appropriations,  and  I  quote  the  following 
question  and  answer  from  a  printed  report  of  his  testimony: 

Mr.  Sibley.  I  would  like  to  ask  you  (perhaps  not  entirely  connected  with  the 
matter  under  discussion)  what  objection  there  could  be  to  having  the  option  of  re- 
deeming cither  in  silver  or  gold  lie  with  the  Treasury  instead  of  the  note  holder? 

Secretary  Carlisle.  If  that  policy  had  been  adopted  at  the  beginning  of  resump- 
tion—and I  am  not  saying  this  for  the  purpose  of  criticising  the  action  of  any  of  my 
predecessors,  or  anybody  else — but  if  the  policy  of  reserving  to  the  Government,  at  the 
beginning  of  resumption,  the  option  of  redeeming  in  gold  or  silver  all  its  paper  pre- 
sented, I  believe  it  would  have  worked  beneficially,  and  there  would  have  been  no 
trouble  growing  out  of  it,  but  the  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury  from  the  beginning  of 
resumption  have  pursued  a  policy  of  redeeming  in  gold  or  silver,  at  the  option  of  the 
holder  of  the  paper,  and  if  any  Secretary  had  afterwards  attempted  to  change  that 
policy  and  force  silver  upon  a  man  who  wanted  gold,   or  gold  upon  a  man  who  wanted 


144  SEIGNIORAGE.  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

silver,  and  especially  if  he  had  mado  that  attempt  at  such  a  critical  period  as  we 
have  had  in  the  last  two  years,  my  judgment  is,  it  would  have  been  very  disastrous. 
There  is  a  vast  difference  between  establishing  a  policy  at  the  beginning,  and  revers- 
ing a  policy  after  It  has  been  long  established,  and,  especially,  after  the  situation  has 
been  changed. 

This  is  sufficient  proof  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  has  the  legal 
right  to  redeem  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  in  silver,  but  is  restrained  by  the 
fear  that,  a  different  precedent  having  been  established,  an  exercise  of  the  legal 
right  at  this  time  would  be  "very  disastrous." 

Senator  Sherman  in  March,  1878,  in  testimony  given  before  a  Senate  com- 
mittee, also  recognized  the  right  of  the  Government  to  redeem  greenbacks  with 
silver.     I  quote  from  his  testimony: 

Senator  Bayard.  You  speak  of  resumption  upon  a  bimetallic  basis  being  easier. 
Do  you  make  that  proposition  irrespective  of  the  readjustment  of  the  relative  values 
of  the  two  metals  as  we  have  declared  them? 

Secretary  Sherman.  I  think  so.  Our  mere  right  to  pay  in  silver  would  deter  a 
great  many  people  from  presenting  notes  for  redemption  who  would  readily  do  so  if 
they  could  get  the  lighter  and  more  portable  coin  in  exchange.  Besides  gold  coin  can 
be  exported,  while  silver  coin  could  not  be  exported,  because  its  market  value  is  less 
than  its  coin  value.    •    •    • 

Senator  Bayard.  By  the  1st  of  July  next  or  the  1st  of  January  next  you  have 
eighteen  or  twenty  millions  of  silver  dollars  which  are  in  circulation  and  payable  for 
duties,  and  how  long  do  you  suppose  this  short  supply  of  silver  and  your  control  of  it 
by  your  coinage  will  keep  it  equivalent  to  gold— when  one  is  worth  10  cents  less  than 
the  other. 

Secretary  Sherman.  Just  so  long  as  it  can  be  used  for  anything  that  gold  is  used 
for.  It  will  be  worth  in  this  country  the  par  of  gold  until  it  becomes  so  abundant  and 
bulky  that  people  will  become  tired  of  carrying  it  about;  but  in  our  country  that 
can  be  avoided  by  depositing  it  for  coin  certificates. 

No  law  has  ever  been  passed  surrendering  the  Government's  right  to  redeem 
in  silver;  and  it  is  as  valuable  now  as  it  was  just  after  the  passage  of  the  Bland 
law  of  1878,  which  restored  silver  as  a  part  of  our  standard  money.  The 
testimony  above  quoted  was  given  by  Senator  Sherman,  then  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  soon  after  the  passage  of  the  Bland  act  and  before  the  resumption  of 
specie  payment. 

Now,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  Government  has  a  legal  right  to 
redeem  in  silver  and  thus  protect  the  people  from  the  gold  hoarders  and  gold 
exporters,  the  President  ccntinues  to  pay  in  gold  even  when  gold  must  be 
purchased  by  an  issue  of  bonds,  and  we  can  not  authorize  the  issue  of  any 
bonds  for  the  purpose  of  buying  gold,  without  indorsing  the  policy  which 
permits  the  drain  of  gold  and  thus  gives  an  excuse  for  a  bond  issue.  So  far, 
the  surrender  to  the  note  holder  of  the  right  to  designate  the  coin  of  payment 
is  purely  an  act  of  the  Executive  and  has  never  received  legislative  approval. 
If  it  is  said  that  the  President  will  issue  bonds  anyhow  and  that  we  ought 
therefore,  to  authorize  a  bond  drawing  a  lower  rate  of  interest,  I  reply  that  until 
we  can  restrain  the  President  from  further  increasing  our  bonded  indebtedness 
and  compel  him  to  protect  the  Government  by  redeeming  in  silver  when  that 
is  more  convenient,  we  can  better  aflford  to  allow  him  to  bear  the  respon- 
sibility alone  than,  by  approving  his  course,  pledge  the  Government  to  a  con- 
tinuation of  his  policy.  If  the  Secretary  thinks  that  it  would  now  be  disastrous 
to  depart  from  a  precedent  established  by  a  former  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
how  much  more  difficult  it  would  be  to  change  the  policy  after  once  indorsing 
it  by  an  act  of  Congress. 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS.  145 

So  long  as  the  note  holder  has  the  option,  bonds  may  be  issued  over  and 
over  again  without  avail.  Gold  will  be  withdrawn  either  directly  or  indirectly 
for  the  purpose  of  buying  bonds,  and  an  issue  of  bonds  compelled  again,  when- 
ever bond  buyers  have  a  surplus  of  money  awaiting  investment.  This  experi- 
ment has  been  tried,  but,  instead  of  convincing  the  President  of  the  futility 
of  bond  issues,  it  has  simply  led  him  to  try  a  new  experiment.  By  purchasing 
gold  in  Europe  he  may  enlarge  the  circle  around  which  the  gold  must  pass,  but 
he  will  not  change  the  operation  or  protect  the  Government.  The  only  remedy 
is  the  restoration  of  the  bimetallic  principle  and  the  exercise  of  the  option  to 
redeem  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  in  silver  whenever  silver  is  more  con- 
venient, or  whenever  such  a  course  is  necessary  to  prevent  a  run  upon  the 
Treasury.  To  delay  the  remedy  is  to  prolong  our  embarrassment;  to  authorize 
bonds  of  any  kind  is  to  rivet  upon  the  country  the  policy  which  has  brought 
our  present  troubles  upon  us;  to  authorize  bonds  payable  specifically  in  gold  is 
to  invite  new  difficulties  and  to  establish  a  still  more  dangerous  precedent. 

I  am  glad  to  hear  some  of  our  Republican  friends  denounce  this  gold-bond 
proposition,  but  are  they  not  in  efifect  condemning  a  Republican  policy?  The 
gold  bond  is  the  legitimate  result  of  the  policy  inaugurated  and  continued  by 
Republican  administrations.  It  was  a  Republican  administration  which  first 
surrendered  to  the  note  holder  the  option  to  demand  gold  in  redemption  of 
greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes,  and  it  was  rumored  that  President  Harrison 
was  preparing  to  issue  bonds  to  buy  gold  just  before  his  term  expired.  The 
substitute  for  the  Springer  bill,  that  is,  the  substitute  offered  by  the  gentleman 
from  Maine  (Mr.  Reed),  authorized  the  issue  of  coin  bonds  to  buy  gold,  and 
yet  the  Republicans,  almost  without  exception,  voted  for  that  substitute. 

I  offered  an  amendment  to  the  Reed  substitute,  an  amendment  which  re- 
affirmed the  Matthews  resolution  declaring  all  coin  bonds  payable  in  gold  or 
silver,  and  yet  less  than  twenty  (I  think  only  thirteen)  Republicans  voted  for  my 
amendment.  The  great  majority  of  the  Republicans  thus  declared  that  coin 
bonds  are  gold  bonds  in  fact.  If  coin  bonds  are  really  gold  bonds,  there  is 
less  reason  for  agitation  about  the  use  of  the  word  gold  in  the  bond.  We,  who 
believe  that  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  are  redeemable  in  either  gold  or 
silver  at  the  option  of  the  Government — we,  who  believe  in  the  right  of  the 
Government  to  redeem  its  coin  bonds  in  either  gold  or  silver — we,  I  say,  can 
object  to  gold  bonds  as  a  violent  change  in  our  monetary  policy,  but  those 
who  insist  that  greenbacks.  Treasury  notes,  and  coin  bonds  are  all  payable  in 
gold  on  demand  have  far  less  reason  to  criticise  the  President. 

I  repeat,  the  President  is  simply  carrying  a  Republican  policy  to  its  logical 
conclusion.  If  the  Republicans  are  in  earnest  in  their  opposition  to  gold  bonds 
let  them  come  with  us  and  help  to  make  all  bonds  unnecessary  by  restoring 
the  bimetallic  principle  and  exercising  the  option  vested  in  the  Government 
to  redeem  coin  obligations  in  either  gold  or  silver.  The  Government  is  helpless 
so  long  as  it  refuses  to  exercise  this  option. 

Mr.  Dunn.     Don't  you  want  to  make  it  more  helpless? 

Mr.  Bryan.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  propose  to  make  it  more  helpless.  I  pro- 
pose the  only  policy  which  will  help  the  Government.  I  propose  the  only 
policy  which  will  stop  the  leak  in  the  Treasury.  I  only  ask  that  the  Treasury 
Department  shall  be  administered  in  behalf  of  the  American  people,  and  not 
in  behalf  of  the  Rothschilds  and  other  foreign  bankers. 


146  SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

But,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  desire,  in  conclusion,  to  call  the  attention  of  our  East- 
ern brethren  to  the  fact  that  this  controversy  can  be  no  longer  delayed.  The 
issue  has  come  and  it  must  be  met.  On  these  financial  questions  we  find  that 
the  Democrats  of  the  East  and  the  Republicans  of  the  East  lock  arms  and  pro- 
ceed to  carry  out  their  policies,  regardless  of  the  interests  and  the  wishes  of  the 
rest  of  the  country.  If  they  form  this  union,  offensive  and  defensive,  they 
must  expect  that  the  rest  of  the  people  of  the  country  will  drop  party  lines,  if 
necessary,  and  unite  to  preserve  their  homes  and  their  welfare. 

If  this  is  sectionalism,  the  East  has  set  the  example.  The  demand  of  our 
Eastern  brethren,  both  Republicans  and  Democrats,  is  for  a  steadily  appreci- 
ating monetary  standard.  They  are  creditors;  they  hold  our  bonds  and  cur 
mortgages,  and,  as  the  dollars  increase  in  purchasing  power,  our  debts  increase 
and  the  holders  of  our  bonds  and  mortgages  gather  in  an  unearned  increment. 
They  are  seeking  to  reap  where  they  did  not  sow;  they  are  seeking  to  collect 
that  to  which  they  are  not  entitled;  they  favor  spoliation  under  the  forms  of 
law.  The  necessary  result  of  their  policy  is  the  building  up  of  a  plutocracy 
which  will  make  servants  of  the  rest  of  the  people. 

This  effort  has  gone  on  steadily,  and,  for  the  most  part,  stealthily,  during 
the  past  twenty  years,  and  this  gold  bond  proposition  is  but  another  step  in 
the  direction  of  financial  bondage.  But  I  warn  them  that  no  slavery  was  ever 
perpetual.  It  has  often  been  attempted,  it  has  even  been  successfully  attempted 
for  a  time,  but  the  shackles  are  always  broken  at  last.  Bondage  is  ephemeral, 
freedom  is  eternal.  "Weeping  may  endure  for  a  night,  but  joy  cometh  in  the 
morning." 

The  time  will  come  when  the  unjust  demands  and  the  oppressive  exactions 
of  our  Eastern  brethren  will  compel  the  South  and  West  to  unite  in  the  restora- 
tion of  an  honest  dollar — a  dollar  which  will  defraud  neither  debtor  nor  cred- 
itor, a  dollar  based  upon  two  metals,  "the  gold  and  silver  coinage  of  the  Con- 
stitution." "Thomas  Jefferson  still  survives"  and  his  principles  will  yet  tri- 
umph. He  taught  equality  before  the  law;  he  taught  that  all  citizens  are 
equally  entitled  to  the  consideration  of  government;  he  taught  that  it  is  the 
highest  duty  of  government  to  protect  each  citizen  from  injury  at  the  hands 
of  any  other  citizen.  We  seek  to  apply  his  principles  today  to  this  great  ques- 
tion; we  seek  to  protect  the  debtor  from  the  greed  of  the  creditor;  we  seek 
to  protect  society  from  the  avarice  of  the  capitalist.  We  believe  that  in  the 
restoration  of  bimetallism  we  shall  secure  the  re-establishment  of  equity  and 
restore  prosperity  to  our  country. 

There  was  great  rejoicing  among  the  opponents  of  the  measure 
when  the  vote  disclosed  its  defeat. 

Just  before  the  close  of  the  session  the  Speaker  appointed  Hon. 
David  Culberson,  of  Texas,  and  Hon.  Robert  E.  Hitt,  of  Illinois,  as  the 
House  members  of  a  commission  to  attend  an  international  monetary 
conference  which  then  seemed  about  to  be  called.  The  House  by 
unanimous  vote  made  Speaker  Crisp  a  member  of  the  commission. 
The  appointment  of  this  commission  aroused  some  discussion  in  regard 
to  international  bimetallism  and  on  the  last  day  of  the  session,  a  little 


SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS.  147 

before  adjournment,  I  made  my  last  speech  in  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives.    I  said: 

International  Bimetallism. 

While  we  are  in  favor  of  sending  delegates  to  this  conference,  we  have  no 
great  hope  that  such  a  conference  will  accomplish  anything,  nor  do  we  believe 
that  an  international  agreement  is  necessary;  but  at  this  time  the  United  States 
is  not  coining  silver,  and  it  is  obviously  impossible  to  secure  any  action 
favorable  to  silver  before  March  4,  1897.  If,  while  the  United  States  refuses  to 
coin  silver,  we  refuse  to  send  representatives  to  an  international  conference 
our  refusal  will  be  taken  as  a  declaration  against  silver  rather  than  in .  its 
favor. 

My  reason  for  believing  that  an  international  monetary  conference  is  not 
likely  to  accomplish  anything  is  that  other  nations  do  not  stand  in  the 
same  attitude  that  we  do.  It  has  been  said  by  the  gold  advocates  in  England, 
and  well  said,  that  England  is  a  creditor  nation,  and  that,  as  she  draws 
her  income  from  all  other  nations,  she  profits  by  the  appreciation  of  the 
doUan  Those  who  are  in  authority  there  realize  that  and  openly  admit 
it,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  we  can  expect  those  who  are  profiting  by 
the  appreciation  of  the  dollar  to  join  heartily  in  the  restoration  of  bimetallism. 

Mr.  Harcourt  said  in  the  English  Parliament  the  other  day,  that,  while  the 
Government  would  not  object  to  the  proposition  then  made,  he  had  no 
hope  of  the  conference  resulting  in  any  good.  He  denounced  to  the  advocates 
of  bimetallism  that  England  is  opposed  to  any  change  in  her  financial 
system.  I  do  not  believe  that  this  monetary  conference  is  even  likely  to  be 
convened  at  the  instance  of  a  foreign  nation;  and,  if  it  is  convened,  I  do 
not  believe  that  it  will  result  in  any  agreement.  And  yet,  sir,  we  who  believe  in 
free  coinage,  we  who  think  that  this  nation  can  and  should  undertake  free 
coinage  alone — we,  I  say,  are  not  willing  to  place  ourselves  in  the  attitude  of 
refusing  to  lend  a  helping  hand  if  any  other  nation  desires  a  conference. 

The  Reichstag  of  Germany  has,  it  is  true,  declared  in  favor  of  reconvening 
the  monetary  conference.  But,  as  I  understand  it,  that  is  the  popular  branch 
of  the  legislature  and  may  not  result  in  any  action  on  the  part  of  the  Govern- 
ment. In  the  action  taken  by  the  Reichstag,  however,  we  find  strong  proof 
that  in  Germany,  which  more  than  twenty  years  ago  adopted  the  gold  standard, 
it  has  been  demonstrated  that  the  gold  standard  is  a  failure  for  the  masses 
of  the  people  and  only  beneficial  to  the  capitalistic  classes.  And  it  is  a 
significant  fact  that  just  after  the  Reichstag  resolved  in  favor  of  international 
bimetallism  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  Berlin  passed  resolutions  con- 
demning the  action  of  the  Reichstag  and  approving  of  the  gold  standard. 
They  have  the  same  contest  over  there  that  we  have  here. 

They  have  a  contest  between  the  money  power  and  the  common  people, 
but  the  money  power  has  a  greater  advantage  there  than  here.  If,  in  this 
country,  where  we  have  universal  sufifrage  and  a  more  equal  distribution 
of  wealth  than  is  found  in  Germany,  we  have  labored  in  vain  for  twenty 
years  to  restore  bimetallism  after  it  was  stricken  down  in  the  dark  and  without 
public  discussion,  what  hope  is  there  in  Germany  or  in  England  where  great 
national  debts  held  by  the  capitalistic  classes  make  the  Governments  the 
slaves  of  the  money  lenders? 


148  SEIGNIORAGE,  CURRENCY  AND  GOLD  BONDS. 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  am  in  favor  of  doing  anything  which  looks  toward  the 
restoration  of  silver,  but  I  want  it  understood  that  while  we  are  willing  to 
send  delegates  to  an  international  conference  and  are  anxious  to  send  real 
advocates  of  silver  who  will  vote  and  work  for  the  restoration  of  bimetallism, 
yet  we  are  not  in  favor  of  waiting  upon  that  conference  for  one  day  or  one  hour. 
Whether  the  conference  is  held  or  not  we  are  in  favor  of  continuing  the 
agitation,  and  shall  endeavor  at  the  very  first  moment  to  secure  the  passage 
of  a  bill  providing  for  "the  immediate  restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  present  legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  as  such  coinage 
existed  prior  to  1873,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other 
nation,  such  gold  and  silver  coin  to  be  a  full  legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public 
and  private." 

If  this  conference  results  in  good,  all  right;  we  shall  accept  the  good 
and  be  thankful.  If  it  results  in  nothing,  as  the  three  previous  conferences 
have,  we  need  not  feel  disappointed  nor  cast  down.  I  believe  that  inde- 
pendent action  on  our  part  at  once  would  force  other  nations  to  restore 
bimetallism  much  sooner  than  such  a  result  can  be  secured  by  words  of 
persuasion.  In  other  words,  I  believe  that  we  shall  wait  for  bimetallism 
by  an  international  agreement;  I  believe  that  this  nation  alone  is  able  to  main- 
tain the  parity  between  gold  and  silver  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i,  and  I  further 
believe  that  the  worst  results  which  can  possibly  follow  from  independent 
action  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  will  be  better  for  our  people  than  the 
best  results  which  can  follow  from  our  present  financial  policy. 

Mr.  Dingley.  I  understand  the  gentleman  to  say  that  he  is  in  favor  of 
the  free  coinage  of  silver  by  this  country  at  a  ratio  of  16  to  i? 

Mr.  Bryan.     Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Dingley.     Does  the  gentleman  believe  that  it  will  result  in  bimetallism? 

Mr.    Bryan.     Yes,    sir;    I    do. 

Mr.    Dingley.     How? 

Mr.  Bryan.  Because  I  believe  that  this  country  is  great  enough  to  main- 
tain the  parity  between  the  two  metals  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i. 

Mr.  Dingley.  By  buying  silver  at  $1.29  an  ounce,  when  it  is  only  worth  63 
cents  in  the  market? 

Mr.  Bryan.  If  the  gentleman  understands  the  meaning  of  free  coinage, 
he  understands  that  it  does  not  mean  the  buying  of  an  ounce  of  silver.  We  do 
not  want  to  buy  silver.  We  want  to  open  the  mints  to  silver  as  the  mints 
are  now  open  to  gold. 


CHAPTER  V. 


PIONEER  WORK  IN  NEBRASKA. 

ONE  evening  in  May,  1894,  a  few  Nebraska  Democrats  assembled 
at  the  Paxton  Hotel  in  Omaha,  the  following  persons  being 
present:  Judge  Joseph  E.  Ong  of  Geneva,  Hon.  J.  B.  Kitchen 
of  Omaha,  Hon.  C.J.  Smyth  of  Omaha,  Judge  J.  H.  Broady  of  Lincoln, 
Hon.  William  H.  Thompson  of  Grand  Island,  Hon,  James  C.  Dahlman 
of  Chadron,  Hon.  John  Thomsen  of  Fremont,  Hon.  G.  A.  Luikart  of 
Norfolk,  Hon.  John  C.  Van  Housen  of  Schuyler,  Hon.  C.  V.  Casper  of 
David  City,  Hon.  Edward  Falloon  of  Falls  City,  Hon.  W.  H.  Kelligar 
of  Auburn,  Frank  J.  Morgan,  Esq.,  of  Plattsmouth,  and  Richard  L. 
Metcalfe  of  the  editorial  stafiF  of  the  Omaha  World-Herald. 

I  have  given  the  names  of  these  gentlemen  because  they  were  pio- 
neers in  a  great  movement  and  originated  a  plan  which  was  afterward 
successfully  applied  to  national  poUtics.  They  were  all  men  of  stand- 
ing in  the  State  and  most  of  them  men  of  considerable  property. 
Messrs.  Thomsen,  Luikart,  Van  Housen  and  Casper  were  members 
of  the  State  Legislature;  Judge  Broady  had  been  upon  the  district 
bench.  (He  was  a  candidate  for  Congress  in  1896  and  came  within 
three  hundred  votes  of  election.)  Mr.  Smyth  had  been  a  member  of 
the  Legislature  and  has  since  been  elected  attorney  general  of  the 
State.  Mr.  Thompson  (of  Grand  Island)  is  the  present  Democratic 
national  committeeman  for  the  State  of  Nebraska  and  Mr.  Dahlman 
is  the  present  chairman  of  the  Democratic  State  Committee.  Mr. 
Metcalfe  is  now  editor-in-chief  of  the  World-Herald.  I  cannot  say 
with  whom  the  idea  first  originated,  but  these  congenial  spirits,  on  the 
evening  mentioned,  decided  to  call  a  conference  of  silver  Democrats 
to  be  held  at  Omaha  on  the  21st  of  June,  1894.  While  I  had  dis- 
cussed with  some  of  the  gentlemen  the  necessity  of  making  a  fight  for 
the  control  of  the  party  organization  in  the  State,  I  knew  nothing  of 
this  plan  until  the  conference  had  been  called.  Upon  invitation,  I 
visited  Nebraska  and  addressed  this  conference.  A  few  days  before 
leaving  Washington,  I  received  a  letter  from  a  Nebraska  friend  who 
suggested  that  a  few  silver  Democrats  had  expressed  themselves  in 
favor  of  a  demand  for  bimetallism  without  naming  any  ratio.     Believ- 

o  149 


150  PIONEER  WORK  IN  NEBRASKA. 

ing  it  necessary  to  make  a  bold  and  emphatic  declaration,  I  at  once 
telegraphed  that  the  subject  of  my  address  would  be: 

We  favor  the  immediate  restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of 
gold  and  silver  at  the  present  ratio,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent 
of  any  other  nation  on  earth. 

I  found  upon  my  arrival  that  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  had 
decided  to  embody  my  subject  in  the  platform,  but  before  the  platform 
was  ready  to  report  some  one  asked  me  whether  the  words  "present 
ratio"  meant  the  present  legal  ratio  or  the  present  bullion  ratio,  and,  to 
avoid  ambiguity,  the  declaration  was  so  amended  as  to  read : 

We  favor  the  immediate  restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of 
gold  and  silver  at  the  present  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or 
consent  of  any  other  nation  on  earth. 

The  platform  also  announced  to  the  Democrats  of  the  State 
that  the  silver  question  would  be  submitted  to  the  primaries 
for  the  decision  of  the  voters.  The  conference  resulted  in 
a  complete  organization  among  the  silver  Democrats,  reaching 
from  a  State  executive  committee  down  to  a  committeeman 
in  each  County  and,  where  possible,  in  each  precinct.  The 
Democratic  State  Committee  was  asked  to  set  an  early  date  for  the 
convention,  but,  being  controlled  by  the  gold  element,  refused  this 
request  and  delayed  the  State  Convention  until  September.  This 
delay,  however,  instead  of  injuring,  really  benefited  the  silver  Demo- 
crats and  enabled  them  to  make  a  more  complete  canvass  of  the  State. 
When  the  convention  met,  the  silver  Democrats  were  in  control  by  a 
vote  of  nearly  three  to  one.  Mr.  Euclid  Martin,  the  chairman  of  the 
State  committee,  called  the  convention  to  order  and,  at  the  request 
of  the  committee,  suggested  a  temporary  chairman.  The  silver 
Democrats  had  asked  for  the  selection  of  one  of  their  number  and  when 
their  request  was  refused  moved  to  substitute  the  name  of  their  candi- 
date, Hon.  Ed.  P.  Smith,  for  the  one  suggested  by  the  committee. 
After  some  debate,  the  candidate  suggested  by  the  committee  withdrew 
his  name  and  Mr.  Smith  was  elected  without  further  opposition.  I 
wrote  the  money  plank  adopted  by  the  convention ;  it  reads  as  follows : 

■  We  indorse  the  language  used  by  Hon.  John  G.  Carlisle  in  1878,  when  he 
denounced  the  "conspiracy"  to  destroy  silver  money  as  "the  most  gigantic 
crime  of  this  or  any  other  age,"  and  we  agree  with  him  that  "the  con- 
summation of  such  a  scheme  would  ultimately  entail  more  misery  upon  the 
human  race  than  all  the  wars,  pestilences  and  famines  that  ever  occurred  in 
the  history  of  the  world."  We  are  not  willing  to  be  parties  to  such  a  crime,  and 
in  order  to  imdo  the  wrong  already  done,  and  to  prevent  the  further  appreciation 
of  money,    we    favor   the    immediate    restoration    of    the    free    and    unlimited 


PIONEER  WORK  IN  NEBRASKA.  151 

coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  present  ratio  of  i6  to   i,  without  waiting 
for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other  nation  on  earth. 

We  regard  the  right  to  issue  money  as  an  attribute  of  sovereignty  and 
believe  that  all  money  needed  to  supplement  the  gold  and  silver  coinage  of 
the  Constitution,  and  to  make  the  dollar  so  stable  in  its  purchasing  power 
that  it  will  defraud  neither  debtor  nor  creditor,  should  be  issued  by  the 
general  Government,  as  the  greenbacks  were  issued;  that  such  money  should 
be  redeemable  in  coin,  the  Government  to  exercise  the  option  by  redeeming 
in  gold  or  silver,  whichever  is  most  convenient  for  the  Government.  We 
believe  that  all  money  issued  by  the  Government,  whether  gold,  silver,  or  paper, 
should  be  made  a  full  legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private,  and  that 
no  citizen  should  be  permitted  to  demonetize  by  contract  that  which  the 
Government  makes  money  by  law. 

The  platform  also  declared  in  favor  of  the  income  tax,  arbitration 
and  the  foreclosure  of  the  Pacific  liens.  In  fact,  in  1894  the  Demo- 
crats of  Nebraska  contended  for  substantially  the  same  policies  which 
were  embodied  in  the  Democratic  National  Platform  of  1896.  To  carry 
the  parallel  a  little  further,  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  Republicans 
won  in  Nebraska  in  1894;  in  1896,  however,  they  lost.  In  1894  they 
secured  a  two-thirds  majority  in  the  Legislature  and  elected  all  the 
State  officers  except  governor;  in  1896  the  fusionists  secured  a  two- 
thirds  majority  in  the  Legislature  and  elected  every  State  official. 

But  to  return  to  the  convention.  After  the  adoption  of  the  plat- 
form and  the  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the  United  States  Senate, 
the  convention  proceeded  to  nominations  for  State  officers.  Hon.  Silas 
A.  Holcomb,  who  had  been  previously  nominated  by  the  Populists, 
was,  by  a  large  majority,  made  our  nominee  for  Governor  and  several 
other  Populist  nominees  were  placed  upon  our  ticket.  A  few  of  the 
gold  Democrats,  after  taking  part  in  the  convention  during  its  tempo- 
rary organization,  during  the  adoption  of  the  platform,  during  the 
nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the  United  States  Senate  and  during  the 
selection  of  the  State  committee,  left  the  hall  as  soon  as  Mr,  Holcomb 
was  nominated.  These,  together  with  a  few  who  had,  at  the  primaries, 
failed  of  election  as  delegates,  assembled  in  a  room  of  the  Paxton  Hotel 
and  organized  a  new  party.  They  called  themselves  "straight  Demo- 
crats" and  their  candidates  for  State  offices  were  placed  upon  the 
official  ballot  by  petition. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  course  pursued  by  the  gold  Demo- 
crats of  Nebraska  was  the  same  as  that  pursued  two  years  later  by  the 
gold  Democrats  of  the  United  States  and,  it  may  be  added,  that  in 
Nebraska,  as  later  in  the  United  States,  they  sought  to  secure  the  elec- 
tion of  the  Republican  candidates.    The  following  year  the  Democrats 


152  PIONEER  WORK  IN  NEBRASKA. 

met  in  convention,  readopted  the  platform  of  1894,  and  nominated 
candidates  for  supreme  judge  and  regents  of  the  university,  these 
being  the  only  officers  voted  for  at  that  election. 

The.  bolting  Democrats  continued  their  organization  and  placed  a 
ticket  in  the  field.  This  year  they  dropped  the  word  "straight"  and, 
taking  advantage  of  a  court  decision,  placed  their  candidates  on  the 
official  ballot  as  "Democrats."  According  to  our  ballot  law,  the 
names  of  candidates  are  arranged  in  alphabetical  order  and  it  so  hap- 
pened that  their  candidates  came  before  ours  on  the  ballot  and  since 
both  their  candidates  and  ours  were  marked  "Democrat"  with  nothing 
further  to  distinguish  between  them,  and  as  there  was  no  State  cam- 
paign to  bring  the  matter  before  the  voters,  their  candidates  received 
more  votes  than  ours. 

In  the  following  spring,  our  State  committee  sent  a  letter  to  the 
State  committee  of  the  bolting  Democrats,  proposing  to  submit  the 
silver  question  to  the  Democratic  voters  at  a  primary  election  with  the 
agreement  that  the  delegates  to  the  National  Convention  should  repre- 
sent the  sentiment  which  prevailed  at  the  primaries.  This  proposition 
was  refused  by  the  bolters  and  two  delegations  sought  admission  to  the 
Chicago  Convention.  Our  State  convention,  held  in  the  spring  of 
1896  to  select  delegates  to  the  National  Convention,  adopted  a  plat- 
form substantially  like  the  one  in  1894.  As  will  appear  later,  the  bolters 
occupied  seats  in  the  National  Convention  during  the  temporary  or- 
ganization, while  the  regular  delegation  (the  one  advocating  free  coin- 
age at  16  to  i)  was  afterwards  seated  by  the  convention. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 

IN  NOVEMBER,  1889,  a  National  Silver  Conference  was  held  at  St. 
Louis,  Missouri,  Hon.  A.  J.  Warner,  of  Ohio,  was  chosen  perma- 
nent chairman,  and  addresses  were  delivered  by  Senator  William 
M.  Stewart,  of  Nevada,  Hon.  Richard  P.  Bland,  of  Missouri,  and 
others.  This  was  virtually  the  beginning  of  the  American  Bimetallic 
League,  although  the  organization  was  not  actually  perfected  until 
May,  1892,  when,  at  a  second  conference,  the  name  was  chosen,  and 
an  Executive  Committee  appointed,  consisting  of: 

Hon.  A.  J.  Warner,  .President.  W.  J.  Cheney,  of  Pennsylvania. 

Lee  Crandall,  Secretary.  Francis  G.  Newlands,  of  Nevada. 

L.  M.  Rumsey,  of  Missouri.  Ex-Governorjames H.Grant,  Colorado. 

Richard   Lacey,   of  New  York.  Senator  John  W.  Daniel,  of  Virginia. 

Senator  A.  H.  Colquitt,  of  Georgia.  Congressman  Willis  Sweet,  of  Idaho. 

National  conferences  were  held  from  time  to  time  under  the 
auspices  of  this  league,  the  principal  ones  at  Washington,  Des  Moines, 
Iowa,  Chicago  and  St.  Louis.  The  Chicago  conference  was  held 
in  August,  1893,  just  prior  to  the  opening  of  the  extraordinary 
session  of  Congress.  I  attended  this  conference,  and  served  upon  the 
Resolutions  Committee  with  Hon.  Ignatius  Donnelly  of  Minnesota, 
whom  I  then  met  for  the  first  time,  and  with  whose  great  ability 
I  was  at  once  impressed.  The  platform  adopted  declared  against 
unconditional  repeal  and,  quoting  the  language  of  several  prominent 
Democrats  and  Republicans,  demanded  the  immediate  opening  of  our 
mints  to  free  and  unlimited  coinage. 

Among  the  educational  influences  at  work  in  behalf  of  bimetallism 
during  this  period  the  most  potent  was  "Coin's  Financial  School." 
This  little  book  was  written  by  William  H.  Harvey,  of  Chicago,  and 
published  in  June,  1894.  Mr.  Harvey  began,  in  1893,  the  publication 
of  an  illustrated  paper  called  "Coin,"  and  soon  afterward  published 
"Coin's  Hand  Book,"  but  "Coin's  Financial  School"  surpassed  all  of 
his  other  publications,  and  reached  a  wonderful  sale.  The  argument 
was  in  dialogue  form,  and  the  book  aptly  illustrated.  The  discussion 
was  so  elementary  as  to  enable  a  beginner  to  master  the  principles  in- 
volved.    It  is  safe  to  say  that  no  book  in  recent  times  has  produced 

153 


154  THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 

so  great  an  effect  in  the  treatment  of  an  economic  question.  This 
work  was  followed  by  "A  Tale  of  Two  Nations,"  "Coin's  Financial 
School  Up  to  Date,"  "Number  Seven  Coin's  Financial  Series,"  "Num- 
ber Eight  Coin's  Financial  Series,"  and  the  "Patriots  of  America,"  all 
by  the  same  author;  the  last  named  being  the  manual  of  a  national 
order  of  the  same  name  established  by  Mr.  Harvey  for  the  study  of 
political  and  economic  questions.  He  also  published  and  circulated 
in  pamphlet  form  an  argument  of  remarkable  force  and  clearness 
in  defense  of  bimetallism  by  Archbishop  Walsh,  of  Ireland. 

Notwithstanding  the  number  of  publications  issued  by  him,  he 
found  time  to  deliver  many  lectures  and  to  take  part  in  several  de- 
bates, the  most  important  ones  being  with  Prof.  J.  Lawrence  Laughlin, 
of  the  Chicago  University,  and  with  the  late  Hon.  Roswell  P.  Horr, 
of  the  New  York  Tribune.  Mr.  Harvey  attended  the  convention  of  the 
National  Silver  party  held  at  St.  Louis,  and  took  an  active  part  in  the 
campaign. 

On  February  22,  1895,  a  conference  was  held  in  Washington  D. 
C,  attended  by  a  number  of  the  leading  bimetallists,  at  which  an 
address  was  issued  declaring  that  action  favorable  to  bimetallism  was 
improbable  in  the  Democratic  and  Republican  parties  and  calling 
upon  the  friends  of  free  silver  to  unite  in  the  formation  of  a  new 
party  with  the  money  question  as  the  sole  issue.  The  conference  sug- 
gested the  name  of  Hon.  Joseph  C.  Sibley,  of  Pennsylvania,  as  the 
proi)er  person  to  unite  all  the  forces  favorable  to  bimetallism,  and  in- 
vited expressions  upon  the  subject  from  the  people.  "  Hon.  A.  J. 
Warner,  of  Ohio,  Senator  John  P.  Jones,  of  Nevada,  and  Senator 
William  M.  Stewart,  of  the  same  State,  were  the  leading  spirits  in  the 
conference. 

Mr.  Warner,  who,  as  chairman  of  the  American  Bimetallic  League, 
called  this  conference,  deserves  to  be  mentioned  as  one  of  the  most  able 
and  earnest  advocates  of  bimetallism  to  be  found  in  the  country.  No 
one  has  surpassed  him  in  unselfish  devotion  to  the  cause. 

Mr.  Jones  was  a  member  of  the  silver  commission  appointed  during 
the  Forty-fourth  Congress  and  was  one  of  the  delegates  from  the 
United  States  to  the  International  Monetary  Conference  at  Brussels, 
in  1892.  It  may  be  said  without  disparagement  of  the  efforts  of  others, 
that  his  speech  in  opposition  to  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  is  prob- 
ably the  most  complete  and  comprehensive  defense  of  bimetallism  ever 
presented  in  any  language. 

Mr.  Stewart  has  for  manv  vears  been  identified  with  the  silver 


THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING.  155 

cause.  He  has  attended  every  National  conference  where  the  subject 
was  under  consideration,  and  has  devoted  all  his  energies  to  the  restora- 
tion of  the  bimetallic  standard.  I  had  frequent  occasion  to  visit  the 
United  States  Senate  during  the  prolonged  struggle  which  ended  in 
the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law,  and  I  shall  never  forget 
the  earnestness  with  which  he  pleaded  against  the  passage  of  that  act. 
Not  only  has  he  availed  himself  of  every  opportunity  offered  by  his 
official  position,  but  he  has  been  constant  in  his  work  outside  of  the 
Senate,  having  for  more  than  a  year  past  been  connected  with  the 
Silver  Knight  and  National  Watchman,  a  paper  published  at  Washing- 
ton and  devoted  to  the  restoration  of  the  money  of  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  Sibley  was  elected  to  the  Fifty-third  Congress  by  the  Demo- 
crats, Populists  and  Prohibitionists,  and  in  a  single  speech  took  a  fore- 
most place  among  the  advocates  of  free  silver.  This  speech  was  very 
widely  circulated,  both  at  the  time  and  during  the  last  campaign.  He 
is  a  man  of  deep  convictions  and  a  speaker  of  great  force  and  elo- 
quence. 

I  mention  this  conference  more  at  length  than  others  because  it 
marked  the  transition  from  educational  work  to  political  effort. 

Early  in  1895  a  conference  was  held  at  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah,  out  of 
which  grew  the  National  Bimetallic  Union,  with  headquarters  at  Chi- 
cago. This  organization  established  a  weekly  paper  called  the 
"Bimetallist,"  published  at  Chicago.  Hon.  H.  F.  Bartine,  for  many 
years  a  member  of  Congress  from  Nevada,  was  installed  as  editor  of 
this  paper,  and  under  his  guidance  it  became  a  great  educational 
power.  Its  editorials  were  widely  quoted  by  che  daily  and  weekly  press. 

During  the  closing  days  of  the  Fifty-third  Congress  the  writer 
assisted  in  the  preparation  of  an  address  which  was  signed  by  Messrs. 
Bland  of  Missouri,  Cofifeen  of  Wyoming,  Fithian  of  Illinois,  Cockrell  of 
Missouri,  McLaurin  of  South  Carolina,  Maguire  of  California,  Ikirt 
of  Ohio,  Whiting  of  Michigan,  Richardson  of  Michigan,  Snodgrass 
of  Tennessee,  Smith  of  Arizona,  Ogden  of  Louisiana,  Capehart  of  West 
Virginia,  Moore  of  Kansas,  Money  of  Mississippi,  Fyan  of  Missouri, 
Morgan  of  Missouri,  Grady  of  North  Carolina,  Shell  of  South  Carolina, 
Lane  of  Illinois,  Donovan  of  Ohio,  Latimer  of  South  Carolina,  Arnold 
of  Missouri,  Denson  of  Alabama,  Talbert  of  South  Carolina,  Williams 
of  Mississippi,  Strait  of  South  Carolina,  Joseph  of  New  Mexico,  Cam- 
inetti  of  California,  Bower  of  North  Carolina,  and  myself — all  Demo- 
cratic members  of  Congress,  and  Col.  Evan  P.  Howell,  editor  of  the 
Atlanta  Constitution,  and  Hon.  J.  Floyd  King,  of  Louisiana,    The  two 


156  THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 

last  named  were  strong  advocates  of  free  silver  and  happened  to  be 
in  the  city  at  the  time  the  address  v^as  being  prepared.  This  address 
is  given  in  full,  together  with  the  autograph  signatures,  because  it 
was  the  beginning  of  the  successful  effort  upon  the  part  of  the  silver 
Democrats  of  the  nation  to  take  control  of  the  Democratic  organiza- 
tion. Many  of  the  silver  papers  placed  the  address  at  the  head  of  their 
editorial  columns  and  proceeded  to  advocate  the  policy  therein  out- 
lined. 

An  Important  Document. 

To  the  Democrats  of  the  United  States: 

We,  the  undersigned  Democrats,  present  for  your  consideration  the 
following  statement: 

We  believe  that  the  establishment  of  gold  as  the  only  monetary 
standard  and  the  elimination  of  silver  as  a  full  legal  tender  money,  will 
increase  the  purchasing  power  of  each  dollar,  add  to  the  burden  of  all 
debts,  decrease  the  market  value  of  all  other  forms  of  property,  con- 
tinue and  intensify  business  depression,  and,  finally,  reduce  the  ma- 
jority of  the  people  to  financial  bondage. 

W^e  believe  that  no  party  can  hope  for  enduring  success  in  the 
United  States  so  long  as  it  advocates  a  single  gold  standard,  and  that 
the  advocacy  of  such  a  financial  policy  would  be  especially  fatal  to  a 
party  which,  like  the  Democratic  party,  derives  its  voting  strength  from 
those  who  may  without  reproach  be  called  the  common  people ;  and  we 
point  to  the  overwhelming  defeat  of  the  party  in  1894,  to  the  opposi- 
tion aroused  by  the  veto  of  the  seigniorage  bill  and  to  the  still  more 
unanimous  protest  against  the  issue  of  gold  bonds,  as  proof  that  the 
Democratic  party  cannot  be  brought  to  the  support  of  the  gold  stand- 
ard policy. 

We  believe  that  the  money  question  will  be  the  paramount  issue  in 
1896,  and  will  so  remain  until  it  is  settled  by  the  intelligence  and 
patriotism  of  the  American  voters. 

We  believe  that  a  large  majority  of  the  Democrats  of  the  United 
States  favor  bimetallism,  and  realize  that  it  can  only  be  secured  by  the 
restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the 
present  ratio,  and  we  assert  that  the  majority  have,  and  should  exercise, 
the  right  to  control  the  policy  of  the  party  and  retain  the  party  name. 

We  believe  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  majority,  and  within  their 
power,  to  take  charge  of  the  party  organization  and  make  the  Demo- 
cratic party  an  effective  instrument  in  the  accomplishment  of  needed 
reforms.     It  is  not  necessary  that  Democrats  should  surrender  their 


THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 


157 


convictions  on  other  questions  in  order  to  take  an  active  part  in  the 
settlement  of  the  question  which  at  this  time  surpasses  all  others  in 
importance. 

We  believe  that  the  rank  and  file  of  the  Democratic  party  should 
at  once  assert  themselves  in  the  Democratic  party  and  place  the  party 
on  record  in  favor  of  the  immediate  restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  present  legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  as  such 
coinage  existed  prior  to  1873,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of 
any  other  nation,  such  gold  and  silver  coin  to  be  a  full  legal  tender  for 
all  debts  public  and  private. 

We  urge  all  Democrats  who  favor  the  financial  policy  above  set 
forth  to  associate  themselves  together,  and  impress  their  views  upon 
the  party  organization;  we  urge  all  newspapers  in  harmony  with  the 
above  financial  policy  to  place  it  at  the  head  of  the  editorial  column  and 
assist  in  the  immediate  restoration  of  bimetallism. 


1^  ^  c^oLj- 


6  ^^^^-  '%u^aL^^ 


K<^^(g--^H.- 


«^3r 


158  THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 

The  main  difficulty  encountered  by  those  who  insisted  upon  the 
immediate  organization  of  the  silver  forces  within  the  Democratic  party 
was  the  fear  expressed  by  many  Democrats  that  the  effort  might  dis- 
turb the  party  harmony.  \\'e  were  unexpectedly  aided  by  a  letter 
written  by  President  Cleveland  to  Hon.  Henry  S.  Robbins  of  Chicago, 
declining  an  invitation  to  visit  that  city  in  the  interest  of  "sound 
money,"  as  the  gold  standard  was  euphoniously  called.  This  letter 
was  a  call  to  all  the  advocates  of  the  gold  standard,  regardless  of  party, 
to  unite  for  the  defeat  of  free  coinage,  and  it  convinced  many  doubting 
ones  that  the  President  and  his  associates  did  not  expect  to  support 
the  Democratic  ticket  unless  they  controlled  the  convention.  This 
letter  is  such  an  excellent  illustration  of  the  ambiguity  and  indirectness 
generally  indulged  in  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  by  the  opponents 
of  bimetallism,  that  it  is  reproduced  in  full : 

President  Cleveland's  Letter  on  Sound  Money. 

Executive  Mansion,  Washington,  D.  C,  April  13,  1895. 

Gentlemen:  I  am  much  gratified  by  the  exceedingly  kind  and  the  com- 
plimentary invitation  you  have  tendered  me  on  behalf  of  many  citizens  of  Chi- 
cago to  be  their  guest  at  a  gathering  in  the  interest  of  sound  money  and  whole- 
some financial  doctrine.  My  attachment  to  this  cause  is  great,  and  I  know  so 
well  the  hospitality  and  kindness  of  the  people  of  Chicago,  that  my  personal 
inclination  is  strongly  in  favor  of  accepting  your  flattering  invitation;  but  my 
judgment  and  my  estimate  of  the  proprieties  of  my  official  place  oblige  me  to 
forego  the  enjoyment  of  participating  in  the  occasion  you  contemplate.  I  hope, 
however,  that  the  event  will  mark  the  beginning  of  an  earnest  and  aggressive 
effort  to  disseminate  among  the  people  safe  and  prudent  financial  ideas.  Noth- 
ing more  important  can  engage  the  attention  of  patriotic  citizens,  because  noth- 
ing is  so  vital  to  the  welfare  of  our  countrymen  and  to  the  strength,  prosperity 
and  honor  of  our  nation. 

The  situation  confronting'  us  demands  that  those  who  appreciate  the  im- 
portance of  this  subject  and  those  who  ought  to  be  the  first  to  see  impending 
danger  should  no  longer  remain  indifferent  or  over-confident.  If  the  sound 
money  sentiment  abroad  in  the  land  is  to  save  us  from  mischief  and  disaster, 
it  must  be  crystallized,  combined  and  made  immediately  active.  It  is  danger- 
ous to  overlook  the  fact  that  a  large  number  of  our  people  with  scanty  oppor- 
tunity thus  far  to  examine  the  question  in  all  its  aspects,  have  nevertheless  been 
ingeniously  pressed  with  specious  suggestions,  which  in  this  time  of  misfortune 
and  depression  find  willing  listeners,  prepared  to  give  credence  to  any  scheme 
which  is  plausibly  presented  as  a  remedy  for  their  unfortunate  condition. 

What  is  now  needed  more  than  anything  else  is  a  plain  and  simple  presen- 
tation of  the  argument  in  favor  of  sound  money.  In  other  words,  it  is  a  time 
for  the  American  people  to  reason  together  as  members  of  a  great  nation 
which  can  promise  them  a  continuance  of  protection  and  safety,  only  so  long 
as  its  solvency  is  unsuspected,  its  honor  unsullied  and  the  soundness  of  its 
nioney  unquestioned. 


THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING.  159 

These  things  are  ill-exchanged  for  the  illusions  of  a  base  currency  and 
groundless  hope  of  advantages  to  be  gained  by  a  disregard  of  our  financial 
credit  and  commercial  standmg  among  the  nations  of  the  world.  If  our  peo- 
ple were  isolated  from  all  others,  and  if  the  question  of  our  currency  could  be 
treated  without  regard  to  our  relations  to  other  countries,  its  character  would 
be  a  matter  of  comparatively  little  importance.  If  the  American  people  were 
only  concerned  in  the  maintenance  of  their  precious  life  among  themselves  they 
might  return  to  the  old  days  of  barter  and  in  this  primitive  manner  acquire 
from  each  other  the  materials  to  supply  the  wants  of  their  existence.  But  if 
American  civilization  was  satisfied  with  this,  it  would  abjectly  fail  in  its  high 
and  noble  mission.  In  these  restless  days  the  farmer  is  tempted  by  the  assur- 
ance that  though  our  currency  may  be  debased,  redundant  and  uncertain,  such 
a  situation  will  improve  the  price  of  his  products.  Let  us  remind  him  that  he 
must  buy  as  well  as  sell. 

It  ought  not  to  be  difficult  to  convince  the  wage-earner  that  if  there  were 
benefits  arising  from  a  degenerated  currency  they  would  reach  him  least  of  all 
and  last  of  all.  In  an  unhealthy  stimulation  of  prices,  an  increased  cost  of  all 
the  needs  of  his  home  must  belong  to  his  portion,  while  he  is  at  the  same  time 
vexed  with  vanishing  visions  of  increased  wages  and  an  easier  lot.  The  pages 
of  history  and  experience  are  full  of  the  lesson.  An  insidious  attempt  is  made 
to  create  a  prejudice  against  the  advocates  of  a  safe  and  sound  currency  by  the 
insinuation,  more  or  less  directly  made,  that  they  belong  to  financial  and  the 
business  classes,  and  therefore  are  not  only  out  of  sympathy  with  the  common 
people  of  the  land,  but  for  selfish  and  wicked  purposes  are  willing  to  sacrifice 
the  interests  of  those  outside  of  their  circles.  I  believe  that  capital  and  wealth, 
through  combinations  and  other  means,  sometimes  gain  an  undue  advantage; 
and  it  must  be  conceded  that  the  maintenance  of  a  sound  currency  may,  in  a 
sense,  be  invested  with  a  greater  or  less  importance  to  individuals  according  to 
their  conditions  and  circumstances. 

It  is,  however,  only  a  difference  in  degree,  since  it  is  utterly  impossible  that 
any  one  in  our  broad  land,  rich  or  poor,  whatever  may  be  his  occupation  and 
whether  dwelling  in  a  center  of  finance  and  commerce  or  in  a  remote  corner  of 
our  domain,  can  be  really  benefited  by  a  financial  scheme  not  alike  beneficial 
to  all  our  people,  or  that  any  one  should  be  excluded  from  a  common  and  uni- 
versal interest  in  the  safe  character  and  staple  value  of  the  currency  of  the  coun- 
try. In  our  relation  to  this  question,  we  are  all  in  business,  for  we  all  buy  and 
sell;  so  we  all  have  to  do  with  financial  operations,  for  we  all  earn  money  and 
spend  it.  We  cannot  escape  our  interdependence.  Merchants  and  dealers  are 
in  every  neighborhood  and  each  has  its  shops  and  manufacturers.  Wherever 
the  wants  of  man  exist,  business  and  finance  are  in  some  degree  found  related  in 
one  direction  to  those  whose  wants  they  supply,  and  in  another  to  the  more 
extensive  business  and  finance  to  which  they  are  tributary. 

A  fluctuation  in  prices  at  the  seaboard  is  known  the  same  day  or  hour  in 
the  remotest  hamlet.  The  discredit  or  depression  in  financial  centers  of  any 
form  of  money  in  the  hands  of  the  people  is  a  signal  of  immediate  loss  every- 
where. If  reckless  discontent  and  wild  experiments  should  sweep  our  cur- 
rency from  its  safe  support,  the  most  defenseless  of  all  who  suffer  in  the  time  of 
distress  and  national  discredit  would  be  the  poor  as  they  reckon  their  loss  in 


160  THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 

their  scanty  support,  and  the  laborer  and  workingman  as  he  sees  the  money  he 
has  received  for  his  toil  shrink  and  shrivel  in  his  hand  when  he  tenders  it  for 
the  necessaries  to  supply  his  humble  home. 

Disguise  it  as  we  may,  the  line  of  battle  is  drawn  between  the  forces  of  safe 
currency  and  those  of  silver  monometallism.  I  will  not  believe  that  if  our  peo- 
ple are  afforded  an  intelligent  opportunity  for  sober  second  thought  they  will 
sanction  schemes  that,  however  inviting,  mean  disaster  and  confusion,  nor  that 
they  will  consent  by  undermining  the  foundation  of  a  safe  currency  to  endanger 
the  beneficent  character  and  purposes  of  their  government. 

Yours  truly, 

Grover  Cleveland. 

I  immediately  published  in  the  editorial  columns  of  the  Omaha 
World-Herald  an  open  letter,  intended  to  call  attention  to  the  evasion 
employed  by  the  President.  This  letter,  which  was  quite  extensively 
copied  at  the  time,  is  given  below: 

Open  Letter  to  President  Cleveland, 
Omaha,  Neb.,  April  i8,  1895. — Hon.  Grover  Cleveland,  President — Dear 
Sir:  In  your  recent  letter  declining  an  invitation  to  attend  the  Chicago  "gath- 
ering in  the  interest  of  sound  money,"  you  say:  "What  is  now  needed  more 
than  anything  else  is  a  plain  and  simple  presentation  of  the  argument  in  favor 
of  sound  money."  To  "a  vast  number  of  our  people"  Coin's  Financial  School 
seems  to  be  "a  plain  and  simple  presentation  of  the  argument  in  favor  of  sound 
money,"  but  some  of  your  friends  have  not  been  pleased  with  the  argument. 
Since  you  secured  the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  you  have  very 
properly  taken  the  place  so  long  held  by  the  author  of  that  law,  Senator  Sher- 
man, and  are  now  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the  gold  standard  advocates  of 
the  United  States,  both  Democratic  and  Republican;  and  to  you,  therefore,  as 
the  leader  of  that  element,  the  people  naturally  look  for  "a  plain  and  simple 
presentation  of  the  argument  in  favor  of  sound  money,"  as  you  understand 
"sound  money,"  or,  at  least,  for  an  intelligent  definition  of  "sound  money." 
What  do  you  mean  by  the  phrase  "sound  money?"  In  your  letter  you  make 
frequent  use  of  that  and  kirrdred  phrases.  In  fact,  in  the  course  of  your  letter 
you  speak  three  times  of  "sound  money,"  twice  of  a  "safe  currency,"  once  of  a 
"sound  currency,"  once  of  a  "safe  and  sound  currency,"  once  of  "safe  and  pru- 
dent financial  ideas,"  and  once  of  "wholesome  financial  doctrine."  You  also 
speak  once  of  a  "debased  currency,"  once  of  a  "degenerated  currency"  and 
once  of  "cheap  money."  In  one  place  you  describe  your  opponents  as  "the 
forces  of  silver  monometallism,"  but  you  nowhere  explain  what  you  mean  by 
"sound  money,"  or  what  you  consider  "cheap  money."  Now,  everybody  favors 
"sound  money'  and  a  "safe  currency,"  and  a  plain  and  simple  statement  of  what 
you  mean  by  these  euphonious  and  universally  admired  phrases  might  dispel 
the  war  clouds  and  make  a  "line  of  battle"  unnecessary.  If  by  "sound  money" 
you  mean  a  gold  standard,  why  did  you  avoid  the  use  of  the  word  "gold"  in 
your  letter?  If  by  a  "safe  currency"  you  mean  bimetallism,  why  did  you  avoid 
the  use  of  the  word  "bimetallism"  in  your  letter?  Your  letter  nowhere  con- 
tains a  direct  reference  either  to  the  gold  standard  or  to  bimetallism,  but  is  quite 


THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING.  161 

replete  with  expressions  which  may  mean  a  great  deal  or  nothing,  according  to 
the  interpretation  placed  upon  them.  Your  opponents  have  always  given  you 
credit  for  courageously  defining  your  position  on  public  questions;  will  you 
prove  their  confidence  well  founded  by  stating  frankly  what  kind  of  a 
financia'.  system  we  shall  enjoy  "if  the  sound  money  sentiment  abroad  in  the 
land"  succeeds  in  saving  "us  from  mischief  and  disaster?"  Your  opponents 
candidly  avow  their  purpose  and  clearly  outline  the  legislation  which  they 
desire;  is  it  not  fair  to  ask  that  you  define  your  policy  with  as  much  frankness? 
Your  opponents  favor  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  bullion  into 
dollars,  each  containing  25.8  grains  of  standard  gold;  are  you  in  favor  of  this? 
Your  opponents  are  in  favor  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  bullion 
into  dollars,  each  containing  412.5  grains  of  standard  silver;  are  you  in  favor 
of  this?  If  not,  are  you  in  favor  of  the  coinage  of  silver  bullion  into  dollars  of 
any  size?  If  not  in  favor  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  what  charge,  if  any, 
would  you  make  for  coinage?  If  you  are  not  in  favor  of  the  unlimited  coinage 
of  silver,  what  limit  would  you  suggest?  Your  opponents  not  only  believe  in 
the  restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  at  the 
present  ratio  of  16  to  i,  but  they  are  in  favor  of  taking  this  action  at  once,  with- 
out waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other  nation  on  earth;  do  you  agree 
with  them?  If  not,  do  you  favor  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  by  international 
agreement?  If  you  are  in  favor  of  an  international  agreement,  what  ratio  would 
you  advise  and  what  nations  are,  in  your  opinion,  necessary  to  such  an  agree- 
ment? If  you  favo**  an  international  agreement,  how  long  are  you  willing  to 
wait  for  it?  Your  opponents  are  in  favor  of  making  standard  gold  coin  and 
standard  silver  coin  equally  a  legal  tender  for  all  debts  public  and  private,  and 
are  opposed  to  making  a  silver  dollar  a  promise  to  pay  a  gold  dollar,  or  a  gold 
dollar  a  promise  to  pay  a  silver  dollar;  do  you  agree  with  them?  Your  oppo- 
nents believe  that  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the 
present  ratio  of  16  to  i  by  the  United  States,  regardless  of  the  action  of  other 
nations,  will  give  us  "sound  money"  and  a  "safe  currency;"  they  not  only 
believe  this,  but  they  support  their  position  by  arguments  so  "plausibly  pre- 
sented" that  even  you  are  frightened  into  the  belief  that  "the  sound  money 
sentiment"  "must  be  crystallized  and  combined  and  made  immediately  active" 
in  order  to  prevent  their  success  at  the  polls.  Can  you  define  your  position  so 
clearly  and  defend  it  so  plausibly  as  to  scare  your  opponents  as  badly  as  they 
have  scared  you?  Is  the  failure  of  gold  standard  advocates  to  define  their  pur- 
poses and  defend  their  financial  system  due  to  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  subject, 
or  to  an  unwillingness  to  let  the  people  know  what  they  intend?  If  "the  pro- 
prieties" of  your  "official  place  oblige"  you  "to  forego  the  enjoyment"  which 
you  would  derive  from  the  writing  of  another  letter  explaining  your  last  letter 
and  defining  your  position  on  the  financial  question,  please  designate  some  one 
who  has  authority  to  speak  for  you  so  that  the  people  may  be  "afforded  an 
intelligent  opportunity,"  as  you  suggest,  to  study  and  decide  this  now  para- 
mount public  question. 

In  May  of  the  same  year  Secretary  Carlisle  delivered  an  address  to 
a  non-partisan  gathering  at  Memphis,  Tennessee,  following  out  the 
line  of  policy   laid   down   in   Mr.    Cleveland's   letter.     This   speech 


162  THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 

was  intended  to  inaugurate  an  administration  campaign  in  the  South- 
ern States,  and  was  followed  by  several  similar  speeches  in  Kentucky, 
where  a  State  contest  was  in  progress. 

Upon  invitation  of  the  Democrats  of  Memphis,  I  replied  to  Mr. 
Carhsle's  speech  the  following  evening  and  employed  a  part  of  his 
celebrated  speech  of  1878  to  answer  the  arguments  which  he  advanced 
a-t  Memphis. 

The  silver  Democrats  were  so  aroused  by  the  now  evident  purpose 
of  the  gold  Democrats,  that  a  large  number  of  them  joined,  with  many 
Populists  and  silver  Republicans,  in  a  non-partisan  convention,  held 
at  Memphis,  Tennessee,  in  June.  I  attended  this  convention  and  as 
a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  made  the  acquaintance 
of  many  who  afterwards  became  prominent  in  the  fight. 

The  conference  appointed  a  National  Silver  Committee  to  carry  on 
the  work.  Political  conditions  were  arising,  however,  which  made  non- 
partisan action  difficult,  and  within  a  few  days  after  the  adjournment  of 
this  convention  (June  18  was  the  date)  Senator  Isham  G.  Harris,  of 
Tennessee,  Senator  James  K.  Jones,  of  Arkansas,  and  Senator  David 
Turpie,  of  Indiana,  joined  in  a  letter  to  the  prominent  silver  Demo- 
crats of  the  nation,  stating,  among  other  things,  "that  a  thorough 
organization  of  the  Democrats  of  the  several  States  who  favor  the 
free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  on  terms  of  equality, 
at  16  to  I,  is  a  necessary  and  proper  means  of  controlling  the  action 
of  the  National  Democratic  Convention  of  1896,  upon  this  vitally 
important  question,"  and  calling  upon  them  to  meet  at  Washington, 
D.  C,  on  the  14th  of  August,  1895,  to  perfect  an  organization.  This 
conference  was  held  in  the  parlors  of  the  Metropolitan  Hotel,  on 
the  day  appointed,  and  some  thirty-seven  States  and  Territories  were 
represented.  The  conference  resulted  in  the  formation  of  the  Bimetallic 
Democratic  National  Committee,  consisting  of  Senator  Harris,  Chair- 
man, Senator  Jones,  Treasurer,  Hon.  T.  O.  Towles,  of  Missouri, 
Secretary,  and  Senator  Turpie,  Governor  William  J.  Stone,  of  Mis- 
souri, Secretary  of  State  William  H,  Hinrichsen,  of  Illinois,  Congress- 
man Charles  F.  Crisp,  of  Georgia,  and  Plon.  Casey  Young,  of 
Tennessee  the  remaining  members.  The  convention  "empowered  this 
Executive  Committee  to  select  and  appoint  a  full  National  Com- 
mittee, one  member  from  each  State  and  Territory,  and  extend-  the 
organization  among  Democrats  throughout  the  Union,  wherever 
deemed  wise  and  expedient."  In  the  exercise  of  this  authority  the 
committee  appointed  the  following  State  committeemen:     John  W. 


THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING.  163 

Tomlinson,  Birmingham,  Alabama;  Carroll  Armstrong,  Morrillton, 
Arkansas;  Thomas  J.  Clunie,  San  Francisco,  California;  C.  S.  Thomas, 
Denver,  Colorado;  Frank  G.  Harris,  Ocala,  Florida;  Patrick  Walsh, 
Augusta,  Georgia;  George  Ainslie,  Idaho  City,  Idaho;  G.  W.  Fithian, 
Newton,  Illinois;  B.  F.  Shively,  South  Bend,  Indiana;  S.  B.  Evans, 
Ottumwa,  Iowa;  David  Overmyer,  Topeka,  Kansas;  H.  A.  Sommers, 
Elizabethtown,  Kentucky;  jVIelton  J.  Cunningham,  Natchitoches, 
Louisiana;  Frank  K.  Foster,  Boston,  Massachusetts;  George  P.  Hum- 
mer, Holland,  Michigan;  Robert  H.  Taylor,  Sardis,  Mississippi;  Lon 
V.  Stephens,  Jefferson  City,  Missouri;  W.  A.  Clarke,  Butte,  Mon- 
tana; C.  J.  Smyth,  Omaha,  Nebraska;  I.  H.  Dennis,  Reno,  Nevada; 
T.  J.  Jarvis,  Greenville,  North  Carolina;  William  M.  Roach,  Lari- 
more.  North  Dakota;  Allen  W.  Thurman,  Columbus,  Ohio;  Thomas 
O'Day,  Portland,  Oregon ;  W.  D.  Mayfield,  Columbia,  South  Carolina ; 
J.  M.  Head,  Nashville,  Tennessee;  Horace  Chilton,  Tyler,  Texas; 
Peter  J,  Otey,  Lynchburg,  Virginia;  C.  H.  Warner,  Colfax,  W^ash- 
ington;  Daniel  B.  Lucas,  Charlestown,  West  Virginia;  J.  E.  Osborne, 
Rawlins,  Wyoming;  William  H.  Barnes,  Tucson,  Arizona;  Dr.  A.  J. 
Beale,  Oklahoma  City,  Oklahoma;  O.  W.  Powers,  Salt  Lake  City, 
Utah;  W.  C.  Hopewell,  Hillsboro,  New  Mexico. 

I  give  the  names  of  this  committee  because  it  was  largely  through 
the  efforts  of  these  men  that  the  silver  Democrats  secured  control  of 
the  Democratic  National  Convention.  The  committee  crystallized  the 
silver  sentiment  in  the  Democratic  party. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  this  work  of  organizing  the  silver  Demo- 
crats of  the  nation  for  the  capture  of  the  National  Convention  was 
identical  in  plan,  in  operation  and  in  result,  with  the  organization 
of  the  silver  Democrats  in  the  State  of  Nebraska,  perfected  more  than 
a  year  before. 

On  January  22,  1896,  a  conference  was  held  at  Washington,  at- 
tended by  the  representatives  of  the  American  Bimetallic  League, 
the  National  Bimetallic  Union  and  the  National  Silver  Committee 
(the  non-partisan  one  appointed  at  Memphis).  At  this  conference 
it  was  decided  to  consolidate  the  three  organizations  and  the  new 
organization  was  named  the  American  Bimetallic  Union,  with  Hon. 
A.  J.  Warner,  President;  R.  C.  Chambers,  of  Utah,  First  Vice- 
President;  Henry  G.  IMiller,  of  Chicago,  Second  Vice-President; 
Thomas  G.  Merrill,  of  Helena,  Montana,  Treasurer;  Edward  B.  Light, 
of  Denver,  Colorado,  Secretary. 

This  conference  issued  a  call  for  tlie  Silver  Convention  which  met 


164  THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 

at  St.  Louis,  Missouri,  on  July  22,  1896.  It  was  the  purpose  of 
those  who  attended  the  conference  to  give  the  Republican  and  Demo- 
cratic parties  an  opportunity  to  declare  for  the  restoration  of  bimetal- 
lism and  to  provide  for  the  nomination  of  a  silver  ticket,  in  case 
both  failed  to  do  so.  The  date  of  the  Silver  Convention  was  made  to 
correspond  with  the  date  of  the  Populist  Convention. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  object  of  these  silver  organizations  was 
to  bring  the  money  question  before  the  American  people  as  the  para- 
mount issue.  They  were  not  only  instrumental  in  doing  this  but  also 
aided  materially  in  bringing  about  co-operation  between  the  silver 
forces  in  the  late  campaign. 

Space  will  not  permit  a  reference  to  all  of  the  literature  circulated 
in  the  various  localities,  I  shall  mention  three  documents,  however, 
which  were  widely  read,  and  which  exerted  very  considerable 
influence.  The  first  was  the  speech  made  by  Mr.  Carlisle,  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  February  21,  1878.  The  following  ex- 
tracts were  the  portions  most  used: 

I  am  opposed  to  the  free  coinage  of  either  gold  or  silver,  but  in  favor  of 

the  unlimited  coinage  of  both  metals  upon  terms  of  exact  equality. 
******* 

If  the  execution  of  this  measure  could  be  intrusted  to  a  public  officer  whose 
opinions  upon  the  subject  were  in  accord  with  those  of  the  great  majority  of 
the  American  people  and  whose  sympathies  were  with  the  struggling  masses 
who  produce  the  wealth  and  pay  the  taxes  of  the  country,  rather  than  with  the 
idle  holders  of  idle  capital,  the  provisions  alluded  to  would  be  of  little  con- 
sequence, because  he  would  coin  the  maximum  (four  millions  per  month) 
instead  of  the  minimum  (two  millions  per  month)  allowed  by  the  amendment. 

4c  *****  * 

Instead  of  constant  and  relentless  contraction;  instead  of  a  constant  appre- 
ciation of  money  and  depreciation  of  property,  we  will  have  expansion  to  the 
extent  of  at  least  two  million  dollars  per  month,  and,  under  its  influence,  the 
exchangeable  value  of  commodities,  including  labor,  will  soon  begin  to  rise, 
thus  inviting  investment,  infusing  life  into  the  dead  industries  of  the  country 
and  quickening  the  pulsations  of  trade  in  all  its  departments. 
******* 

I  know  that  the  world's  stock  of  precious  metals  is  none  too  large,  and  I  see  no 
reason  to  apprehend  that  it  will  ever  be  so.  Mankind  will  be  fortunate  indeed 
if  the  annual  production  of  gold  and  silver  coin  shall  keep  pace  with  the 
annual  increase  of  population,  and  industry.  According  to  my  views  of  the 
subject  the  conspiracy  which  seems  to  have  been  formed  here  and  in  Europe 
to  destroy  by  legislation  and  otherwise  from  three-sevenths  to  one-half  the 
metallic  money  of  the  world  is  the  most  gigantic  crime  of  this  or  any  other  age. 
The  consummation  of  such  a  scheme  would  ultimately  entail  more  misery  upon 
the  human  race  than  all  the  wars,  pestilences,  and  famines  that  ever  occurred 
in  the  history  of  the  world. 


THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING.  165 

The  absolute  and  instantaneous  destruction  of  half  the  entire  movable 
property  of  the  world,  including  houses,  ships,  railroads,  and  other  appliances 
for  carrying  on  commerce,  while  it  would  be  felt  more  sensibly  at  the  moment, 
would  not  produce  anything  like  the  prolonged  distress  and  disorganization  of 
society  that  must  inevitably  result  from  the  permanent  annihilation  of  one-half 
of  the  metallic  money  of  the  world. 


The  struggle  now  going  on  cannot  cease  and  ought  not  to  cease  until  all 
the  industrial  interests  of  the  country  are  fully  and  finally  emancipated  from 
the  heartless  domination  of  the  syndicates,  stock  exchanges,  and  other  great 
combinations  of  money  grabbers  in  this  country  and  Europe. 


Let  us,  if  we  can  do  no  better,  pass  bill  after  bill,  embodying  in  each  one 
substantial  provision  for  relief  and  send  them  to  the  Executive  for  his  approval. 
If  he  withholds  his  signature  and  we  are  unable  to  secure  the  necessary  vote, 
here  or  elsewhere,  to  enact  them  into  laws,  notwithstanding  his  veto,  let  us 
as  a  last  resort,  suspend  the  rules,  and  put  them  into  the  general  appropriation 
bills,  with  the  distinct  understanding  that  if  the  people  can  get  no  relief  the 
Government  can  get  no  money. 

The  second,  was  a  letter  written  by  Mr.  Sherman  in  1878.    The 

following  is  a  copy: 

Treasury  Department,  July  15,  1878. 

Dear  Sir:  To  that  part  of  your  letter  of  the  12th  inst.,  in  which  you  ask 
my  views  of  the  matter  confided  in  the  monetary  commission,  I  have  some 
delicacy  in  replying  very  fully.  During  the  monetary  conference  in  Paris, 
when  silver  in  our  country  was  excluded  from  circulation  by  being  under- 
valued, I  was  strongly  in  favor  of  the  single  standard  of  gold,  and  wrote  a 
letter  which  you  will  find  in  the  proceedings  of  that  conference,  stating  briefly 
my  view.  At  that  time  the  wisest  of  us  did  not  anticipate  the  sudden  fall  of 
silver  or  the  rise  of  gold  that  has  occurred.  This  uncertainty  of  the  relation 
between  the  two  metals  is  one  of  the  chief  arguments  in  favor  of  a  monometallic 
system,  but  other  arguments,  showing  the  dangerous  effect  upon  industry  by 
dropping  one  of  the  precious  metals  from  the  standard  of  value,  outweigh  in 
my  mind  all  theoretical  objections  to  the  bimetallic  system.  I  ami  "thoroughly 
convinced  that  if  it  were  possible  for  the  leading  commercial  nations  to  fix 
by  agreement  an  arbitrary  relation  between  silver  and  gold,  even  though  the 
market  value  might  vary  somewhat  from  time  to  time,  it  would  be  a  measure 
of  the  greatest  good  to  all  nations.  My  earnest  desire  is  that  you  may  succeed 
in  doing  this. 

You  are  so  well  informed  upon  this  subject  that  it  is  not  worth  while  for  me 
to  enlarge  upon  it.  The  statements  and  documents  sent  you  by  the  director  of  the 
mint  will  give  in  authentic  form  most  of  the  material  facts  which  bear  upon  the 
question,  and  your  own  investigation  on  the  silver  commission  will,  I  am  quite 
sure,  supply  any  deficiency.  Very  truly  yours, 

John   Sherman,    Secretary. 
W.  S.  Grosbeck,  Esq.,  Cincinnati,  O. 


166  THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING. 

The  third,  was  a  petition  signed  by  the  officers  of  the  various  labor 
organizations,  and  presented  to  Congress  early  in  1895.  I  give  below 
the  abstract  of  it  circulated  by  the  PopuHst  committee: 

Laix>r  Petition. 

In  view  of  the  general  distress  now  prevailing  throughout  our  country, 
which  has  existed  for  so  many  years,  and  which  will  continue  until  remedial 
legislation  is  enacted — and  all  this  occurring,  too,  at  a  time  when  our  granaries 
are  full  to  repletion,  and  when,  in  the  natural  order  of  things,  our  producers  and 
toilers  should  be  enjoying  to  the  full  the  fruits  of  their  hard  and  con- 
scientious labors — it  seems  to  us  that  the  time  has  come  for  united  action  on 
the  part  of  those  who  create  the  wealth  of  the  country. 

The  respective  demands  and  platforms  of  principles  of  our  several  organiza- 
tions set  forth  our  opinions  as  to  the  causes  that  have  brought  about  this  con- 
dition of  things.  Inasmuch  as  the  leading  representatives  and  friends  of  all  our 
organizations  have  placed  one  of  the  causes  of  the  tribulations  of  our  beloved 
Republic  to  the  departure  of  our  Government  from  the  wise  bimetallic  policy 
of  Washington,  Jefferson,  and  Hamilton,  and  the  substitution  therefor  of  the 
present  monometallic  policy  recommended  by  European  money  owners,  and 
advocated  by  their  American  allies,  we,  the  undersigned  officers  of  industrial, 
agricultural,  and  commercial  organizations,  have  thought  it  best,  at  this 
particular  time,  to  submit  for  your  careful  consideration  a  synopsis  of  the 
legislation,  respecting  the  precious  metals,  enacted  in  this  country  since  the 
foundation  of  this  Government,  that  you  may  judge  for  yourselves  as  to  what 
portion  of  such  legislation  was  enacted  in  the  interest  of  the  producing  and 
what  in  the  interest  of  the  non-producing  classes,  and  as  to  whether  or  not  the 
shrewd  manipulators  of  our  finances  foresaw  that  the  result  of  their  work  would 
be  to  largely  help  in  the  subjugation  of  the  people. 

******* 

Was  such  legislation  just?  Was  it  honest?  Does  it  not  necessarily  follow 
that  demoralization  of  the  food-producing  sections  of  the  country,  through 
failure  to  procure  reasonable  prices  for  their  products,  causes  the  manufacturing 
sections  to  accumulate  excessive  stocks,  and  that,  in  consequence  of  a  poor 
market,  hundreds  of  thousands  of  operatives  are  thrown  out  of  employment, 
thus  robbing  them  of  the  power,  even  at  the  low  prices,  to  purchase  the  neces- 
saries of  life? 

Again,  is  it  not  obvious  to  every  one  that  the  striking  down  of  one-half 
the  world's  volume  of  money  makes  the  remaining  half  a  comparatively  easy 
matter  for  capitalists  to  control  and  manipulate,  and  that  toilers,  to  obtain 
money  for  the  purchase  of  their  food  supplies,  are  placed  entirely  at  the  mercy 
of  the  foreign  and  American  money-sharks,  who,  by  contracting  the  currency, 
can  force  a  panic  or  famine  in  money  at  their  supreme  will? 

Would  they  be  guilty  of  such  a  crime?  We  only  say  in  reply,  look  at  our 
present  helpless  condition.  Does  it  not  seem  to  you,  in  the  light  of  the  fact 
here  given,  that,  where  in  the  midst  of  plenty  there  is  wide-spread  suffering 
and  unhappiness,  there  is  considerable  meat  in  the  refrain  from  Wall  street: 
"Dig  on,  ye  toilers,  dig;  the  legislative  button  that  we  press  will  do  the  rest!" 


THE  SILVER  SENTIMENT  DEVELOPING.  167 

Now,  the  question  is:  What  do  the  tens  of  millions  of  victims  in  this 
country,  to  the  diabolical  gold  standard  policy  of  Lombard  and  Wall  streets, 
propose  doing  about  it?  Submit  to  subjugation,  or  demand  in  no  uncertain 
tones  the  immediate  restoration  of  silver  as  standard  money?  No!  they  will 
no  longer  submit  to  such  injustice!  And  therefore  we  earnestly  recommend 
the  adoption  of  the  following  resolution: 

"We  demand  of  the  present  Congress  the  immediate  return  to  the  money 
of  the  Constitution  as  established  by  our  fathers,  by  restoring  the  free  and  un- 
limited coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  at  the  present  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  the  coins 
of  both  metals  to  be  equally  full  legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private, 
as  before  the  fraudulent  demonetization  of  silver  in  1873. 

"We  also  condemn  the  increase  of  the  national  debt  in  time  of  peace,  and 
the  use  of  interest  bearing  bonds  at  any  time." 
Signed: 

J.  R.  Sovereign, 
General  Master  Workman,  Knights  of  Labor. 
Jno.  W.   Hayes, 
General  Secretary  and  Treasurer,  Knights  of  Labor. 

Samuel  Gompers, 
President  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 
Marion  Butler, 
President  of  the  National  Farmers'  Alliance  and  Industrial  Union. 

H.   H.  Trenor, 
Gen'l  President,  United  Brotherhood  of  Carpenters  and  Joiners  of  America. 

P.  J.  McGuire, 
Gen'l  Secretary,  United  Brotherhood  of  Carpenters  and  Joiners  of  America. 

P.  M.  Arthur, 
Grand  Chief  of  the  United  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Engineers. 

C.  A.  Robinson, 
President  of  the  Farmers'  Mutual  Benefit  Association. 

Frank   P.   Sargent, 
Grand  Master  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Firemen. 

F.   W.    Arnold, 
Grand  Secretary  and  Treasurer  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Firemen. 

John  McBride, 
President  of  the  United  Mine  Workers  of  America. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


THE  REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

THE  Republican  National  Committee  fixed  July  i6, 1896,  as  the  day 
for  the  National  Convention.  The  contest  over  the  money  ques- 
tion was  largely  lost  sight  of  in  the  contest  over  the  Presidential 
nomination.  Except  in  a  few  Western  States  the  State  Conventions 
adopted  platforms  which,  in  varying  language,  declared  against  the  free 
coinage  of  silver.  In  a  few  cases  they  reaffirmed  the  Republican  plat- 
form of  1892.  Several  of  the  Eastern  States  were  quite  pronounced  for 
gold;  the  New  York  Convention  made  its  platform  to  fit  New  York's 
presidential  candidate,  Governor  Morton,  and,  besides  speaking  for 
gold,  suggested  that  the  people  would  prefer  a  business  administra- 
tion conducted  by  business  men  in  behalf  of  the  business  interests  of 
the  country.  In  several  States  the  conventions  not  only  denounced 
free  coinage,  but  condemned  the  agitation  of  the  question.  Some  time 
before  the  convention  convened  it  became  evident  that  Mr.  McKinley 
would  have  a  majority  on  the  first  ballot,  and  the  convention  was, 
therefore,  not  as  exciting  as  it  might  have  been  with  a  more  even 
contest  between  the  leading  candidates. 

When  the  convention  met,  Hon.  Charles  W.  Fairbanks  of  Indiana 
was  made  temporary  chairman,  and  Senator  Thurston  of  Nebraska 
permanent  chairman. 

The  exact  phraseology  of  the  money  plank  of  the  platform  was 
the  only  important  matter  in  dispute.  The  Eastern  Republicans 
wanted  the  platform  to  read  as  strongly  as  possible  for  gold;  the 
Western  Republicans  were  anxious  to  secure  a  free-coinage  plank, 
and  some  of  the  Republicans  in  the  Central  States  preferred  a  plat- 
form which  would  mean  gold  without  using  the  word.  One  west- 
ern delegate  explained  the  position  of  the  neutrals  by  saying  that 
the  people  had  an  unreasonable  prejudice  against  the  word  gold,  and 
that  it  should  be  left  out  and  some  word  substituted  which  had  the 
same  meaning  but  did  not  sound  so  harsh. 

Senator  Henry  M.  Teller  of  Colorado  led  the  fight  for  free  coinage 
and  was  ably  seconded  by  Senators  Fred  T.  Dubois  of  Idaho,  R.  F. 
Pettigrew  of  South  Dakota,  Frank  Cannon  of  Utah  and  Lee  Mantle 

^       168 


THE  REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION.  169 

of  Montana,  and  Congressmen  Charles  S.  Hartman  of  Montana,  John 
F.  Shafroth  of  Colorado,  Clarence  E.  Allen  of  Utah,  and  others. 

The  money  plank  of  the  platform  reported  by  a  majority  of  the 
committee  was  as  follows : 

Money  Plank  of  the  Republican  Platform, 

The  Republican  party  is  unreservedly  for  sound  money.  It  caused  the 
enactment  of  the  law  providing  for  the  resumption  of  specie  payments  in 
1879;  since  then  every  dollar  has  been  as  good  as  gold. 

We  are  unalterably  opposed  to  every  measure  calculated  to  debase  our 
currency  or  impair  the  credit  of  our  country.  We  are,  therefore,  opposed 
to  the  free  coinage  of  silver  except  by  international  agreement  with  the 
leading  commercial  nations  of  the  world,  which  we  pledge  ourselves  to  pro- 
mote, and  until  such  agreement  can  be  obtained  the  existing  gold  standard 
must  be  preserved.  All  our  silver  and  paper  currency  must  be  maintained  at 
parity  with  gold,  and  we  favor  all  measures  designed  to  maintain  inviolably  the 
obligations  of  the  United  States  and  all  our  money,  whether  coin  or  paper,  at 
the  present  standard,  the  standard  of  the  most  enlightened  nations  of  the  earth. 

Senator  Teller,  on  behalf  of  the  minority,  submitted  the  following 
report  and  substitute : 

We,  the  undersigned  members  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions,  being 
unable  to  agree  with  a  portion  of  the  majority  report  which  treats  on  the 
subject  of  coinage  and  finance,  respectfully  submit  the  following  paragraph  as  a 
substitute  therefor:  "The  Republican  party  authorizes  the  use  of  both  gold  and 
silver  as  an  equal  standard  money,  and  pledges  its  power  to  secure  the  free 
and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  our  mints  at  the  ratio  of  16  parts  of 
silver  to  i  of  gold." 

Senator  Teller  then  addressed  the  convention  in  support  of  the 
substitute.  It  was  an  impressive  scene — a  scene  not  to  be  forgotten 
by  any  one  who  witnessed  it.  He  was  deeply  moved  and  his  earnest- 
ness made  even  his  opponents  anxious  to  catch  each  word.  He 
realized  that  nothing  he  could  say  would  affect  the  action  of  the  con- 
vention; he  realized  that  for  the  present  he  was  bidding  farewell 
to  the  Republican  party.  He  had  been  identified  with  that  party  from 
its  birth,  had  received  distinguished  honors  at  its  hands,  had  faithfully 
defended  its  principles  and  its  policies,  and  he  spoke  like  one  whose 
heart  was  almost  broken  at  the  thought  of  separation  from  his  polit- 
ical associates. 

While  the  delegates  were  almost  unanimously  against  the  course 
which  he  advocated,  they  offered  but  little  interruption,  and  that  was 
at  once  checked  by  Chairman  Thurston.  It  is  only  fair  to  say,  in  this 
connection,  that  the  majority,  while  at  all  times  maintaining  control 
of  the  convention,  treated  the  Silver  Republicans  with  all  the  courtesy 


170  THE  REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

and  consideration  which  could  have  been  asked,  and  Senator  Thurs- 
ton, as  the  presiding  officer,  was  eminently  fair  and  impartial  in  his 
rulings. 

I  reproduce  in  full  the  speech  of  Senator  Teller;  it  deserves  to  be 
preserved  for  succeeding  generations : 

Senator  Teller*.  Farew^ell  Address* 

Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  I  will  not  attempt  to  inflict  upon  you  a 
discussion  of  the  great  financial  question  which  is  dividing  the  people,  not 
only  of  this  country,  but  of  the  whole  world.  The  few  moments  allotted  to 
me  by  the  convention  will  not  enable  me  to  more  than  state  in  the  briefest 
possible  manner  our  objections  to  the  financial  plank  proposed  for  your  con- 
sideration. I  am  a  practical  man,  and  I  recognize  the  conditions  existing  in 
this  convention,  foreshadowed,  as  they  were,  by  the  action  of  the  committee 
selected  by  the  representatives  assembled  from  the  different  States. 

This  plank,  or  this  proposition,  was  presented  to  the  whole  committee  and 
by  it  rejected.  Loyalty  to  my  own  opinion,  consideration  for  the  great  interest 
that  is  felt  in  this  country  compel  me,  in  the  face  of  unusual  difficulties, 
to  present  this  substitute  for  your  consideration,  not  with  that  bounding 
hope  or  with  that  assurance  that  I  have  felt  in  presenting  similar  propositions 
in  other  bodies  where  I  have  met  with  greater  measure  of  success  than  I 
can  hope  for  here.  The  great  and  supreme  importance  of  this  question  is 
alone  my  excuse  now  for  the  few  words  that  I  shall  say  to  you. 

In  a  public  capacity,  I  have  dealt  with  this  subject  now  for  twenty  years. 
I  represent  a  State  that  produces  silver,  but  I  want  to  say  to  you  here  and  now 
that  my  advocacy  of  the  proposition  is  not  in  the  slightest  degree  influenced 
or  controlled  by  that  fact. 

I  contend  for  it  because  I  believe  there  can  be  no  proper  financial  system 
in  any  country  in  the  world  that  does  not  recognize  this  principle  of  bimetallism. 

I  contend  for  it  because,  since  1873,  when  it  was  ruthlessly  stricken  from  our 
statutes,  there  has  been  a  continued  depreciation  of  all  the  products  of  human 
labor  and  human  energy. 

I  contend  for  it  because  in  this  year  of  1896  the  American  people  are  in 
greater  distress  than  they  ever  were  in  their  history. 

I  contend  for  it  because  our  present  financial  system  is,  in  my  judgment, 
the  great  weight,  the  great  incubus,  that  has  weighed  down  enterprise  and 
destroyed  progress  in  this  favored  land  of  ours. 

I  contend  for  it  because  I  believe  the  progress  of  my  country  is  dependent 
on  it. 

I  contend  for  it  because  I  believe  the  civilization  of  the  world  is  to  be 
determined  by  the  rightful  or  wrongful  solution  of  this  financial  question. 

I  am  tolerant  of  those  who  differ  from  me.  I  act  from  my  judgment,  en- 
lightened as  best  I  have  been  able  to  enlighten  it  by  many  years  of  study  and 
of  thought.  In  my  judgment  the  American  people  in  the  whole  line  of  their 
history  have  never  been  called  upon  to  settle  a  question  of  greater  importance 
to  them  than  this  question  of  the  currency.  The  great  contest  in  which  many  of 
you  participated  which  was  to  determine  whether  we  should  have  two  flags 


THE  REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION.  171 

or  one  was  not  more  important  to  the  American  people  than  the  question 
of  a  proper  solution  of  what  shall  be  the  money  system  of  this  land. 

I  have  said  enough  to  convince  you  that  I  think  that  this  is  not  a  question  of 
policy,  but  a  question  of  principle.  It  is  not  a  mere  idle  thing,  but  one  on 
which  hangs  the  happiness,  the  prosperity,  the  morality  and  the  independence 
of  American  labor  and  American  producers. 

Confronted  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  this  glorious  party  of  ours, 
confronted,  I  say,  for  the  first  time  with  a  danger  of  a  financial  policy  that, 
in  my  judgment,  will  be  destructive  to  all  the  great  interests  of  this  land, 
we  are  called  upon  to  give  this  provision  of  our  platform  our  adhesion  or 
rejection.  Mr.  President,  I  do  not  desire  to  say  unkind  or  unfriendly  things, 
and  I  will  say  in  a  moment,  and  only  a  moment,  why  I  object  to  this  provision 
of  this  platform.  The  Republican  party  has  never  been  the  party 
of  a  single  standard.  It  was  a  bimetallic  party  in  its  origin  and  has  been  in 
all  its  history.  In  1888  it  declared  for  bimetallism;  in  1892  it  declared  for 
bimetallism.     In  1896  it  declares  for  a  single  gold  standard. 

Mr.  President,  in  1888  we  carried  the  State  that  I  here  represent;  for 
whom?  For  the  Republican  nominee;  we  carried  it  on  a  bimetallic  platform. 
We  carried  it  with  a  majority  that  was  equal,  considering  our  vote,  to  that 
of  any  State  in  the  Union.  It  has  been  a  Republican  State  from  the  hour  of  its 
admission.  It  has  kept  in  the  Senate  Republican  Senators,  and  in  the  House 
Republican  members.  I  promised  you  that  I  would  not  discuss  the  silver 
question,  and  I  will  not  do  so  further  except  to  repeat  that  this  platform  is  such 
a  distinct  departure  from  any  policy  heretofore  enunciated  by  the  Republican 
party  that  it  challenges  our  Republicanism  to  accept  it. 

Mr.  President,  the  platform  contains  some  platitudes  about  international 
conferences.  It  provides  that  we  shall  maintain  the  gold  standard  in  this 
country  until  the  principal  nations  of  the  world  shall  agree  that  we  may 
do  othc-wise.  Sir,  this  is  the  first  great  gathering  of  Republicans  since  this 
party  was  organized  that  has  declared  the  inability  of  the  American  people  to 
control  their  own  affairs. 

To  my  horror,  this  declaration  comes  from  the  great  political  party 
of  Abraham  Lincoln  and  Ulysses  S.  Grant.  Do  you  believe  that  the  American 
people  are  too  weak  to  actually  maintain  a  financial  system  commensurate  with 
the  greatness  of  the  country  of  their  own  fruition?  Gentlemen  of  the  conven- 
tion, you  will  have  no  bimetallic  agreement  with  all  the  great  commercial 
nations  of  the  world;  it  cannot  be  obtained.  Therefore,  this  is  a  declaration 
that  the  gold  standard  is  to  be  put  upon  this  country  and  kept  upon  it  for  all 
time.  Do  you  believe  that  Great  Britain — the  great  commercial  nation  of 
the  world — our  powerful  competitor  in  commerce  and  trade,  will  ever  agree  to 
open  her  mints  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver?  Or  consent  that  we  shall  open 
ours  as  long  as  she  gets  the  advantage  of  the  low  prices  and  the  declining 
values  that  have  been  brought  to  this  country  by  the  adoption  of  a  gold 
standard?  We  are  the  great  debtor  nation  of  the  world.  Great  Britain  is  the 
great  creditor.  We  pay  her  every  year  millions  and  hundreds  of  millions  of 
dollars  which  count  as  income  on  her  investments  in  this  country  or  interest 
on  her  loans.  The  gold  standard,  in  my  judgment,  lowers  prices  and  decreases 
values.     Great  Britain  buys  of  us  millions  and  millions  more  than  she  sells. 


172  THE  REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

and  she  buys  upon  a  gold  standard — a  lowering  and  depreciating  standard. 
How  long  do  you  think  it  will  be  before  she  will  agree  to  a  system  of  finance 
that  raises  the  price  of  the  farm  products,  or  the  products  of  our  mines  in 
this  country? 

it  is  a  solemn  declaration  that  the  Republican  party  intends  to  maintain 
low  prices  and  stagnate  business  for  all  time  to  come. 

There  is  a  beautiful  provision  in  this  piatform  about  the  tariflf.  Mr. 
President,  I  subscribe  to  that.  I  believe  in  a  protective  tariff.  I  have  advocated 
it  for  forty  years.  But  it  is  my  solemn  conviction  that  a  protective  tariff  cannot 
be  maintained  upon  a  gold  standard.  The  tariff  protection  principle  is  for 
the  raising  of  the  price  of  human  toil.  It  is  for  giving  to  the  producer  ample 
compensation  for  his  labor.  The  gold  standard,  on  the  contrary,  everywhere 
that  it  is  enforced,  is  for  the  purpose  of  reducing  values. 

Now,  gentlemen  of  the  convention,  I  am  going  to  make  this  simple 
objection  as  to  the  protective  system,  that  it  is  in  danger,  and  then  I  will  call 
your  attention  to  one  other  fact,  and  then  I  will  leave  it  to  your  judgment 
whether  this  platform  shall  be  adopted  or  rejected.  Under  existing  conditions 
we  undoubtedly  have  a  gold  standard.  I  do  not  deny  that,  but  what  I  have 
sought  for  twenty  years  is  to  change  it  to  the  bimetallic  system.  I  have  be- 
lieved, and  I  now  believe,  that  when  the  Almighty  created  these  twin  metals  He 
intended  that  the  world  should  use  them  for  the  purposes  for  which  they  were 
created.  And  when  He  blessed  this  land  of  ours  with  more  gold  and  more 
silver  than  any  other  country  in  the  world.  He  meant  that  we  should  use  them 
as  standard  money.  We  today  reverse  the  traditions  of  our  country  and  declare 
we  will  use  only  one.  If  the  American  people  are  in  favor  of  that  system  I 
have  nothing  to  say.  I  must  submit  to  the  majority  vote  and  the  majority  voice 
in  this  country  of  ours.  I  do  not  believe  this  party  of  ours,  if  it  could  be 
polled,  is  favorable  of  the  single  gold  standard.  I  believe  that  90  per  cent,  of  the 
American  people  are  in  favor  of  bimetallism  of  the  old-fashioned  kind 
that  eixsted  in  this  country  up  to  1873. 

Mr.  President,  and  gentlemen  of  the  convention,  I  promised  you  that  I 
would  consume  but  little  of  your  time  and  I  believe  I  am  allowed  only  a  few 
minutes  more  in  which  I  can  rapidly  address  you.  I  want,  however,  to  say  a 
few  things  which  may  seeni  to  you  to  be  personal  and  which  ought  not  to 
be  introduced  in  an  audience  like  this.  I  must  beg  your  indulgence  if  I  seem  to 
transcend  the  proprieties  of  this  occasion,  if  I  shall  say  something  personal 
to  myself. 

I  have  formed  my  convictions  on  this  great  question  after  twenty  years  of 
study — after  twenty  years  of  careful  thought  and  careful  reading.  I  have 
been  trained  in  a  school  that  it  seems  to  me  ought  to  fit  me  fairly  well  for 
reaching  just  conclusions  from  established  facts.  I  have  formed  my  conclusions 
to  such  an  extent  that  they  have  become  binding  on  my  conscience.  I  believe  that 
the  adoption  of  the  gold  standard  in  the  United  States  will  work  great  hardship, 
that  it  will  increase  the  distress,  and  that  no  legislation  touching  the  tariff 
can  remove  the  difficulties  that  now  all  admit  prevail  in  this  land.  I  believe 
that  the  whole  welfare  of  my  race  is  dependent  upon  a  rightful  solution  of  this 
question;  that  the  morality,  the  civilization,  nay,  the  very  religion  of  my 
country  is  at   stake   in  this  contest.     I   know,   and  you  know,   that  men  in 


iiMiaiiiiiU'ii:jimi'*\ 


t ^ 


THE  REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION  175 

distress  are  neither  patriotic  nor  brave.  You  and  I  know  that  hunger  and 
distress  will  destroy  patriotism  and  love  of  country.  If  you  have  love  of  coun- 
try, patriotic  fervor  and  independence,  you  must  have  your  citizens  comfortably 
fed  and  comfortably  clothed.  That  is  what  made  me  a  Republican  in  1853;  that 
is  what  made  me  a  Republican  during  all  these  years — because  I  believed  that 
the  Republican  party  stood  for  the  great  masses  of  men;  that  its  legislation  was 
intended  to  lift  up  and  elevate  and  hold  up  and  sustain  the  unfortunate  and  the 
distressed,  and  give  all  American  citizens  equal  opportunities  before  the  law. 
I  do  not  believe  that  these  blessings  can  be  had  with  the  gold  standard. 

You  may  doubt  my  judgment,  and  many  of  you  will.  But,  shall  I  doubt 
it?  I  must  act  upon  my  judgment  and  not  upon  yours.  I  must  answer  to  my 
conscience  and  not  to  my  neighbors'.  I  must  do  my  duty  as  it  is  presented  to  me 
and  not  as  presented  to  you.  I  say  to  you  now,  that  I  may  hasten  my  remarks, 
that  with  the  solemn  conviction  upon  me  that  this  gold  plank  means  ultimate 
disaster  and  distress  to  my  fellow  man,  I  cannot  subscribe  to  it,  and  if  it  is 
adopted  I  must,  as  an  honest  man,  sever  my  connection  with  the  political 
organization  that  makes  that  one  of  the  main  articles  of  its  faith. 

I  repeat  here  what  I  said  yesterday  in  the  committee  on  resolutions — I 
would  not,  upon  my  own  judgment  alone,  carefully  as  I  have  attempted  to 
prepare  it,  dare  to  take  this  step.  My  friends,  I  am  sustained  in  my  views 
of  the  danger  that  is  coming  to  us  and  coming  to  the  world  by  the  adoption 
of. the  gold  standard  by  the  intelligence  of  the  entire  world.  They  may  say 
that  the  silver  question  is  a  craze.  Let  me  tell  you  that  the  best  thought  of 
Europe,  the  best  thought  of  the  world,  is  with  the  advocates  of  bimetallism. 
All  the  great  political  teachers  of  Europe,  with  the  exception  of  five  or  six,  arc 
the  pronounced  advocates  of  bimetallism — unrestricted  and  unrestrained  bimetal- 
lism. All  of  the  great  teachers  of  political  economy  in  the  European  colleges, 
without  exception,  favor  bimetallism. 

My  own  judgment,  based,  as  I  have  said  to  you,  on  careful  preparation 
and  careful  study  for  twenty  years,  bears  me  out  and  puts  me  in  accord  with 
them,  and  I  would  be  recreant  to  my  trust,  given  to  me  by  the  people  of  my 
State,  if  I  failed  to  protest  here,  and  if  I  failed  when  the  Republican  party 
makes  this  one  of  the  tenets  of  its  faith,  to  sever  my  connection  from  that 
party. 

Mr.  President,  I  ask  your  kind  permission  to  say  a  few  things  personal  to 
myself,  and  when  I  have  said  them,  having  told  you  what  my  conscience 
demands  that  I  should  do,  I  will  leave  this  question  for  your  consideration. 

Do  you  suppose  that  myself  and  my  associates  who  act  with  me  and  take 
the  same  view  of  this  question  that  I  do — do  you  suppose  that  we  can  take 
this  step  without  distress?  Do  you  suppose  that  we  could  take  it  for  any 
personal  advantage  or  any  honor  that  could  be  conferred  upon  us?  We  say  it 
is  a  question  of  duty.  You  may  nominate  in  this  convention  any  man  you 
choose;  if  you  will  put  him  on  the  right  kind  of  a  platform  I  will  vote  for  him. 
You  may  use  any  methods  to  nominate  him  that  you  think  proper;  I  will  defer 
to  your  judgment  and  support  him,  if  the  platform  is  a  right  one.  But  when 
you  ask  me  here,  now,  to  surrender  to  you  my  principles,  as  an  honest 
man  I  cannot  do  that.  I  realize  what  it  will  cost  us.  I  realize  the  gibes  and 
sneers  and  the  contumely  that  will  be  heaped  upon  us.  But,  my  fellow  citizens, 
I  have  been  through  this  before,  before  the  political  party  to  which  you  belong 
10 


176  THE  REPUBUCAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

had  a  being.  I  have  advocated  a  cause  more  unpopular  than  the  silver  cause. 
I  have  stood  for  the  doctrine  of  free  men,  free  homes  and  free  speech.  I  am 
used  to  detraction;  I  am  used  to  abuse  and  I  have  had  it  heaped  upon  me 
without  stint. 

When  the  Republican  party  was  organized  I  was  there.  It  has  never  had 
a  national  candidate  since  it  was  organized  that  my  voice  has  not  been  raised 
in  his  support.  It  has  never  had  a  great  principle  enunciated  in  its  platform 
that  has  not  had  my  approbation,  until  now.  With  its  distinguished  leaders, 
its  distinguished  men  of  forty  years,  I  have  been  in  close  communion  and 
close  friendship.  I  have  shared  in  its  honors  and  in  its  few  defeats  and 
disasters.  Do  you  think  that  we  can  sever  our  connection  with  a  party  like  this 
unless  it  be  as  matter  of  duty — a  duty  not  to  our  respective  States  only,  but  a 
duty  to  all  people  of  this  great  land? 

Mr.  President,  there  are  few  men  in  the  Republican  party  who  have  been 
honored  more  than  I  have  by  the  people  of  the  State  in  which  they  live. 
There  are  few  men  in  this  convention  or  anywhere  else  who  have  been  longer 
connected  with  this  organization  than  I  have  been.  There  are  few  men  in 
it  who  have  been  more  active,  and  none  in  it,  no,  not  one,  who  have  been  more 
attached  to  the  great  principles  of  this  party  than  I  have  been;  and  I  cannot 
go  out  of  it  without  heart  burnings  and  a  feeling  that  no  man  can  appreciate 
who  has  not  endured  it.  And  yet  I  cannot,  before  my  country  and  my  God, 
agree  to  that  provision  that  shall  put  upon  this  country  a  gold  standard,  and 
I  will  not. 

And  I  do  not  care  what  may  be  the  result.  If  it  takes  me  out  of  political 
life,  I  will  go  out  with  a  feeling  that  at  least  I  maintained  my  consistency  and 
my  manhood,  and  that  my  conscience  is  clear  and  that  my  country  will  have 
no  right  to  find  fault  with  me. 

I  beg  your  pardon  for  saying  things  so  personal,  but  yet  if  a  personal 
act  that  to  some  implies  perfidy  and  dishonor  is  about  to  be  taken,  I  think  it 
but  just  to  myself  and  my  associates  that  I  should  proclaim  to  you  that  we  take 
this  step,  not  in  anger,  not  in  pique,  not  because  we  dislike  the  nominee, 
prospectively  or  otherwise,  but  because  our  consciences  require  as  honest  men 
that  we  should  make  this  sacrifice — for  sacrifice  we  feel  that  it  is. 

Thank  you,  gentlemen,  for  your  kind  attention.  Retiring  from  you  as  I 
do,  perhaps,  never  again  to  have  an  opportunity  of  addressing  a  Republican 
convention,  I  cannot  do  so  without  saying  that,  after  all,  I  have  in  my  heart 
a  hope — nay,  I  have  an  expectation — that  better  counsels  will  prevail,  and  that 
if  you  should  be  foolish  enough  to  adopt  this  platform  and  force  us  to  leave 
the  Republican  party,  better  counsels  will  prevail  and,  ultimately,  on  a  true 
Republican  platform,  sustaining  Republican  principles,  I  may  have  the  in- 
estimable privilege  of  again  addressing  you. 

The  substitute  was  voted  down  by  a  vote  of  about  ten  to  one,  and 
the  platform  submitted  by  the  majority  of  the  committee  was  adopted 
by  substantially  the  same  vote. 

As  soon  as  the  result  was  announced,  Senator  Teller  and  those 
who  had  acted  with  him  left  the  convention  hall,  cheered  by  those  in 
sympathy  with  them,  and  hissed  by  a  few  opponents. 


THE  REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION.  177 

Hon.  William  McKinley,  Jr.,  of  Ohio,  was  then  nominated  as  the 
Republican  candidate  for  the  presidency,  and  Hon.  Garrett  A.  Hobart, 
of  New  Jersey,  for  the  vice-presidency. 

I  was  an  interested  spectator  at  the  convention.  Occupying  a 
chair  in  the  space  reserved  for  the  press,  I  sent  to  the  Omaha  World- 
Herald  comments  upon  the  important  incidents  of  the  convention.  As 
soon  as  the  platform  was  adopted,  I  wired  the  paper  the  following: 

I  suggest  the  following  silver  plank  for  the  Chicago  convention:  We  are 
unalterably  opposed  to  the  single  gold  standard  and  demand  the  immediate 
restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  present 
legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other  nation 
on  earth.  We  believe  that  the  standard  silver  dollar  should  be  a  full  legal 
tender,  equally  with  gold  coin,  for  all  debts,  public  and  private,  and  we  favor 
such  legislation  as  is  necessary  to  prevent  the  demonetization  of  any  kind  of 
legal  tender  money  by  private  contract.  We  further  insist  that  all  Government 
coin  obligations  should  be  payable  in  either  gold  or  silver,  at  the  option  of  the 
Government. 

This  suggestion  was  published  in  the  World-Herald  at  the  time. 
Later,  at  the  Chicago  convention,  I  suggested  that  the  words  "for  the 
future,"  be  added  in  the  sentence  in  regard  to  gold  contracts  in  order 
to  show  that  we  did  not  mean  to  interfere  with  contracts  already  in 
existence. 


CHAPTER  Vril. 


THE  SILVER  REPUBLICANS. 

THE  Silver  Republicans  met  soon  after  leaving  the  convention  hall 
and  laid  plans  for  future  action.    On  the  19th  of  June  an  address, 
the  writing  of  which  devolved  largely  upon  Senator  Cannon, 
was  issued,  setting  forth  the  reasons  which  led  the  Silver  Republicans 
to  leave  their  party.     This  address  can  hardly  be  surpassed  in  strengfth 
and  terseness.    It  reads  as  follows : 

Address  of  Silver  Republicans. 

Obeying  the  call  of  duty,  and  justified  by  the  common  citizenship  of  this 
Republic,  we  address  this  communication  to  the  people  and  the  forthcoming 
conventions  of  the  United  States.  In  doing  so  we  claim  no  authority  or  right 
other  than  that  which  belongs  to  every  man  to  express  personal  conviction; 
but  we  respectfully  solicit  the  co-operation  of  all  who  believe  that  the  time 
has  come  for  a  return  to  the  simpler  and  more  direct  method  of  naming  men 
for  national  service  than  has  been  obtained  in  recent  years. 

Political  party  organization  is  necessary  because  without  it  the  individual 
voter  is  dumb;  but  the  party  is  only  the  means,  not  the  end;  it  is  the  voice 
and  not  the  sense.  As  the  world  advances  in  this  wonderful  epoch  of  intellec- 
tual development  and  physical  improvement  there  is  a  constant  requirement  for 
better  things.  The  individual  feels  that  requirement  and  heeds  it,  or  he  fails 
in  life's  endeavor.  Parties  must  also  obey  the  same  law.  It  follows,  therefore, 
that  the  moment  a  party  shall  choose  to  stand  still  or  to  retrogress  it  is  no 
longer  efficient  to  achieve  the  end  to  which  the  people  are  necessarily  destined. 
There  is  no  sanctity  in  mere  party  name;  and  the  mark  of  decay  is  set  on  indi- 
vidual strength  in  a  nation,  when  the  absolute  rule  of  political  organization 
coerces  men  from  the  truth  for  the  sake  of  expediency  and  establishes  insincere 
submission  to  partisan  rule  for  the  sake  of  power. 

Recognizing  the  value  and  the  splendid  achievements  of  political  parties  in 
this  country,  as  elsewhere,  we  are  yet  constrained  to  believe  that  for  more  than 
twenty  years  no  one  of  them  has  been  entirely  sufficient  for  the  needs  of  the 
people.  The  great  trend  to  better  things,  resting  in  the  hearts  and  pur- 
poses of  all  men,  has  been  stayed  during  the  latter  part  of  this 
generation  by  the  failure  of  parties  to  express  in  their  achievements  the  highest 
hope  and  aspiration  of  the  mass  of  the  people  who  constitute  the  parties. 
And  there  has  been  growing  in  this  country — swelling  with  each  recurrence 
of  national  election — a  great  mass  of  independent  thinkers  and  voters,  which, 
failing  within  itself  to  control,  has  gravitated  between  the  two  great  parties. 
Since  1872  (excepting  possibly  the  election  of  1876)  the  pendulum  has  swung 
from  side  to  side  with  each  four  years.     In  1872  the  Republican  party  elected 

173 


THE  SILVER  REPUBLICANS.  179 

the  President;  in  1876  the  Democracy  claimed  the  election;  in  1880  the  Re- 
publicans elected;  in  1884  the  Democrats  elected;  in  1888  the  Republicans 
elected;  in  1892  the  Democrats  elected;  in  1896  (until  within  a  few  weeks)  it  has 
been  conceded  that  the  Republicans  would  elect.  What  has  been  the  cause  of 
this  mighty  oscillation  of  a  mass  which  this  year  has  probably  obtained  control- 
ling proportions?  Every  man  can  answer  to  himself.  If  he  has  been  an 
observer,  if  he  has  had  interests  that  were  aflfected,  if  he  has  felt  a  hope  to 
see  greater  justice  done  and  has  seen  that  hope  blasted,  he  knows  that  the 
general  dissatisfaction  has  arisen  from  the  fact  that  party  promises  made  were 
i)roken  to  the  people  by  party  performance;  he  knows  that  so  soon  as  the 
election  was  over  and  successful  candidates  installed  they  became  the  servitors 
of  the  party  and  the  advocates  of  a  narrow  and  non-progressive  policy  within 
which  alone  there  seemed  to  be  an  assurance  of  selfish  safety  and  partisan 
approval.  During  all  this  period  we  have  lacked  a  great  constructive  adminis- 
tration. No  new  social  truth  has  been  put  forward  in  an  effective  way.  While 
in  all  the  departments  of  physical  life  there  have  been  developments  and 
achievements  of  ease  and  comfort  to  the  favored  of  mankind,  in  the  still 
greater  and  more  important  domain  of  the  social  reform  we  have  stood  still 
or  retrogressed. 

It  is  not  that  the  people  have  not  felt  the  stirrings  of  determination,  that 
this  inaction  has  endured;  but  because  of  the  rule  of  party  which  has  largely 
controlled  men  in  and  out  of  office.  It  has  become  a  source  of  reproach  to  any 
man  that  he  should  dare  to  renounce  allegiance  to  organization.  Men  have 
been  expected  to  submit  their  views  to  the  dictation  of  conventions,  although  it 
is  common  knowledge  that  conventions  have  been  swayed  to  views  and  declara- 
tions not  the  most  approved  by  the  mass  of  the  people  nor  progressive  for  their 
welfare. 

We  do  not  arrogate  to  ourselves  one  iota  more  of  intelligence,  patriotism  or 
courage  than  is  possessed  by  any  of  our  fellow  citizens.  But  we  feel  that 
the  time  has  come  for  the  performance  of  a  duty  to  the  country;  and  for  our 
part,  though  we  shall  stand  alone,  we  will  make  an  endeavor  in  the  direction 
of  that  duty.  Parties  may  outlive  their  usefulness;  the  truth  never  becomes 
obsolete.  Every  generation  of  freemen  has  the  right  to  affirm  the  truths  of  past 
knowledge  and  present  acquirement;  and  if  the  enforcement  of  these  truths  shall 
make  necessary  a  departure  from  party  organization,  the  people  have  this  right 
and  will  exercise  it  until  old  parties  shall  return  to  the  truth  or  new  parties  shall 
be  created  to  efifect  it  into  law. 

If  the  voices  which  have  sounded  to  us  from  every  State  in  this  Union 
are  an  indication  of  the  real  feeling,  this  year  is  the  appointed  time  for  the 
people  to  assert  themselves,  through  such  mediums  as  may  give  best  promise 
of  the  achievement  of  justice.  But  whether  we  are  mistaken  or  not  concerning 
the  general  sentiment  in  the  United  States,  we  have  not  mistaken  our  own 
duty  in  withdrawing  from  the  Republican  cenvention,  feeling  that  it  would  be 
better  to  be  right  and  with  the  minority  in  apparent  defeat  than  to  be  wrong 
with  the  majority  in  apparent  triumph. 

We  hold  that  in  the  great  work  of  social  evolution  in  this  country,  monetary 
reform  stands  as  the  first  requisite.  Without  it  there  can  no  longer  be  safety  or 
general  prosperity.     No  policy,  however  promising  of  good  results,  can  take  its 


180  THE  SILVER  REPUBLICANS. 

place.  Continuation  during  the  next  four  years  upon  the  present  financial 
system  will  bring  down  upon  the  American  people  that  cloud  of  impending 
evil,  to  avert  which  should  be  the  first  thought  of  statesmen  and  the  first  prayer 
of  patriots.  Our  very  institutions  are  at  stake.  Today,  with  the  rapidly 
increasing  population,  with  widely  swelling  demands,  the  basis  of  our  money 
is  relatively  contracting;  and  the  people  are  passing  into  a  servitude  all  the 
more  dangerous  because  it  is  not  physically  apparent.  The  nation  itself,  as  to 
other  nations,  is  losing  the  sturdy  courage  which  could  make  it  defiant  in  the 
face  of  injustice  and  international  wrong.  From  the  farmer  and  the  tradesman 
to  the  Government  there  is  apparent  the  same  shrinking  from  giving  offense, 
lest  the  vengeance  of  some  offended  financial  power  shall  descend.  The  busi- 
ness man  submits  some  portion  of  his  judgment  and  his  will,  and  the  nation 
submits  some  portion  of  its  international  right  lest  some  mighty  foreign  creditor 
shall  make  destructive  demands.  Where  will  all  this  end  if  the  people  shall 
decline  to  assert  themselves?  Where  will  it  end  if  the  older  parties  in  their 
determination  to  maintain  themselves  in  power  for  power's  sake  alone  shall 
refuse  to  recognize  the  right  and  the  hope  of  humanity? 

This  country  can  not  much  longer  exist  free  and  independent  against  all  the 
rest  of  the  world,  nor  can  its  people  much  longer  be  free  in  the  noblest  sense 
of  the  term  if  the  United  States,  a  debtor  nation,  shall  follow  a  policy  dictated  by 
creditor  nations.  We  produce  all  of  the  necessaries  of  life.  Other  nations  con- 
sume our  product.  In  the  race  for  existence  it  is  a  constant  struggle  between 
producer  and  consumer.  Our  present  system  of  money  deliberately  submits  to 
the  desire  and  the  profit  of  creditor  nations,  leaving  us  in  the  mass,  and  as 
individuals,  a  prey  to  the  money  gathering  and  the  deadly  cheapening  of  the 
old  world.  As  the  debt  increases  on  the  masses  of  the  nation  toward  creditors 
abroad,  the  price  of  human  production  on  the  farm  and  in  the  workshop  is  de- 
creased with  appalling  rapidity,  exacting  more  and  more  toil  from  our  citizens  to 
meet  the  given  demand,  and  holding  over  their  heads  a  threat  of  the  day  when 
confiscation  to  meet  their  obligations  will  leave  them  bare  and  defenseless. 
The  only  remedy  is  to  stop  falling  prices — the  deadliest  curse  of  national  life. 
Prices  never  will  cease  falling  under  the  single  gold  standard. 

The  restoration  of  bimetallism  by  this  country  will  double  the  basis  of 
our  money  system — in  time  it  will  double  the  stock  of  primary  money  of  the 
world — will  stop  falling  prices  and.  steadily  elevate  them  until  they  will  regain 
their  normal  relation  to  the  volume  of  debts  and  credits  in  the  world.  Bimetal- 
lism will  help  to  bring  about  the  great  hope  of  every  social  reformer,  every 
believer  in  the  advancement  of  the  race,  who  realize  that  the  instability  of 
prices  has  been  the  deadly  foe  of  our  toilers  and  the  servant  of  the  foreign  in- 
terest gatherer.  Bimetallism  will  help  to  bring  the  time  when  a  certain  ex- 
penditure of  human  toil  will  produce  a  certain  financial  result.  Who  among  the 
great  masses  of  our  people  in  the  United  States  but  feels  that  his  lot  would 
be  made  better,  his  aspiration  take  new  wings,  if  he  could  know  in  the  perform- 
ance of  his  labor  what  would  be  the  price  of  his  product? 

Is  not  this  purpose  worth  the  attention  of  the  people  as  individuals,  and 
worth  the  attention  of  political  conventions  yet  to  be  held  in  this  year  1896? 
Is  not  this  so  great  an  end  that  all  who  believe  in  the  possibility  of  attaining  it 
by  the  means  proposed  can  yield  something  of  their  partisanship  both  in  con- 


THE  SIL  VER  REPUBLICANS.  1 8 1 

ventions  and  at  the  polls?  It  is  in  the  hope  that  the  masses  and  the  remaining 
conventions  will  have  the  courage  and  the  generosity  to  ally  for  this  purpose 
that  we  have  dared  to  offer  our  views  to  the  people  of  the  United  States;  and 
because  in  the  past,  there  has  lacked  a  rallying  point  for  the  masses,  who 
hold  as  we  do  to  this  belief,  we  venture  upon  an  act  trusting  that  it  will  be  re- 
ceived in  the  same  spirit  of  conciliation,  concession  and  hope  that  we  put  it 
forth. 

We  have  endeavored  in  a  plain  way  to  set  the  matter  before  the  eyes  of  our 
fellow  citizens.  We  invoke  the  union  of  all  men  and  all  parties  who  believe 
that  the  time  has  come  for  the  triumph  of  justice.  It  is  an  hour  when  the 
people  may  speak  for  themselves  as  individuals  and  through  conventions  yet 
to  be  held.  It  is  the  right  of  every  citizen  to  indicate  his  preference.  With  this 
in  view,  we  offer  to  the  forthcoming  convention  and  to  the  people  the  name  of 
a  man  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States  whose  life,  in  public  and  in 
private,  represents  those  distinguished  virtues  which  adorned  the  days  and  the 
deeds  of  the  earlier  time  of  this  Republic;  a  return  to  which  virtues  is  requisite 
for  the  prosperity  and  contentment  of  the  people  and  the  perpetuity  and  com- 
manding example  of  free  institutions.  That  name  is  Henry  M.  Teller — ^a  man 
of  the  people  and  for  the  people.  He  is  of  no  section.  His  experience  and 
service,  his  devotion  to  the  common  justice  and  the  common  cause  of  his 
fellow  citizens  has  been  as  wide  as  the  country.  We  believe  that  the  people  of 
the  United  States  have  him  in  their  hearts  as  he  has  had  their  interests  in  his 
purpose  through  all  the  work  of  an  exalted  life. 

It  is  not  merely  as  the  exponent  of  monetary  reform  that  we  present  this 
man  to  the  people.  It  is  true  that  he  has  waged  a  mighty  war  for  the  restoration 
of  the  money  of  the  Constitution,  and  his  name  has  been  identified  as  that 
of  no  other  living  man  with  this  great  cause.  But  had  his  services  been  less 
demanded  and  less  noticed  in  this  direction,  the  people  would  still  have  recog- 
nized in  him  for  other  labors  a  statesman  of  the  purest  type.  His  only  poverty 
has  been  that  of  purse;  in  all  things  else — in  the  generosities  of  man  to  man, 
in  kindliness  of  deeds  for  his  fellows,  and  in  the  study  and  the  doings  of  a 
mighty  career,  he  has  been  one  of  the  most  opulent  American  citizens  of  any 
age. 

In  submitting  this  name  to  the  people  we  remind  them  that  just  a  genera- 
tion ago  from  the  heart  of  the  boundless  West,  and  touched  by  the  finger  of 
God,  there  arose  an  emancipator  who  was  powerful  in  the  work  of  human 
deliverance.  By  his  wisdom  and  courage,  providentially  directed,  millions  were 
set  free  and  the  nation  kept  in  its  holy  union.  If  others  shall  see  this  oppor- 
tunity as  we  see  it,  if  our  fellow  citizens  shall  see  this  duty  as  we  see  it,  that 
sublime  history  may  be  repeated,  and  another  man — clothed  in  the  majesty  of 
devotion  to  the  race — will  be  lifted  to  power  where,  by  his  wisdom  and  courage, 
providentially  directed,  more  millions  may  be  made  free  from  chains  as  galling 
as  those  of  actual  slavery,  and  the  nation  may  be  preserved  in  the  unity  of  its 
mission  to  the  world. 

(Signer') 
Fred  T.  Dubois,  Chas.  H.  Brickenstein, 

R.  F.  Pettigrew,  Thomas    Kearns, 

Frank  J.  Cannon,  C  J.  Hart, 


182  THE  SILVER  REPUBLICANS. 

Chas.  S.  Hartman,  L.  Price. 

Clarence  E.  Allen,  Jacob   J.    Elliott, 

Ben  E.  Rich,  6.  J.   Salisbury, 

A.  S.  Robertson,  J.  B.  Overton, 

A.   C.   Cleveland,  Frank  C.  Goudy, 

Willis   Sweet,  J.ohn  F.  Vivian, 

Amasa  B.  Campbell,  J.    W.    Rockefeller, 

Archie  M.  Stevenson,  Robt.  W.  Bonyage, 

Enoch  Strother,  Nevada,  John  M.  Williams, 

James   M.    Downing,  L.  M.  Earl. 

After  the  Chicago  convention,  an  address  was  issued  by  Senators 
Teller,  Dubois  and  Mantle,  Congressmen  Towne,  Shafroth,  Hart- 
man,  Wilson  and  other  leading  silver  Republicans,  giving  their 
reasons  for  supporting  the  Democratic  ticket.     This  address  is  given 

below : 

Silver  Republicans  Declare  for  the  Democratic  Ticket. 

We  deem  it  fitting  that  we,  who  have  heretofore  affiliated  with  the  National 
Republican  party  and  who  have  rejected  the  financial  plank  of  the  platform 
adopted  at  St.  Louis  and  refused  to  support  the  nominee  of  the  convention, 
should  state  our  position  in  the  Presidential  campaign,  and  give  briefly  our 
reasons  in  support  thereof. 

When  certain  delegates  to  the  National  Republican  Convention  repudiated 
the  financial  plank  of  the  platform  and  withdrew  from  the  convention,  we 
determined  that  we  would  give  our  support  to  such  candidates  as  should  ap- 
pear most  willing  and  capable  of  aiding  in  the  restoration  of  silver  to  its 
rightful  place  as  standard  money. 

The  Democratic  party,  in  its  Chicago  convention,  has  taken  a  position  in 
its  platform  so  pronouncedly  favorable  to  silver,  and  has  nominated  candi- 
dates of  such  unquestionable  convictions  in  favor  of  the  bimetallic  policy  and 
of  such  high  personal  character  that  we  have  determined  to  give  them  our 
support.  We  support  such  candidates  because  they  represent  the  great  principle 
of  bimetallism,  which  we  believe  to  be  the  cause  of  humanity  and  civilization, 
and  the  paramount  question  now  before  the  American  people. 

We  therefore  announce  that  we  shall  by  voice  and  vote  support  Messrs. 
Bryan  and  Sewall  for  President  and  Vice-President,  and  we  appeal  to  all 
citizens,  and  especially  to  Republicans  who  feel  as  we  do  that  gold  mono- 
metallism would  be  of  lasting  injury  to  the  country,  to  act  with  us  in  securing 
their  election. 

The  Democrats  who  believe  in  the  gold  standard  are  announcing  their  in- 
tention to  support  Mr.  McKinley,  or  proposing  to  put  a  third  candidate  in 
the  field  for  the  avowed  purpose  of  aiding  Mr.  McKinley's  election.  A  great 
number  of  leading  and  influential  Democratic  journals  have  declared  they 
will  support  the  Republican  nominees.  It  is  evident  there  is  to  be  a  union 
of  forces  on  the  part  of  the  advocates  and  supporters  of  the  gold  standard 
to  elect  Mr.  McKinley  and  a  Congress  favorable  to  him,  which  will  sup- 
port the  financial  policy  outlined  in  the  Republican  platform. 

To  those  who  believe  in  bimetallism,   which   means  the  equal  treatment 


olOUAJL^^^Jpi    ,^H-<y'S^-Ck^K^, 


THE  SILVER  REPUBLICANS.  185 

of  both  gold  and  silver  at  the  mints  of  the  nation,  there  is  but  one  course 
to  pursue,  and  that  is  to  unite  all  the  silver  forces  and  to  oppose  with  all  our 
might  the  candidate  representing  the  policy  which  we  believe  is  fraught 
with  disaster  to  the  nation  and  ruin  to  the  people. 

Gold  monometallism  means  the  shifting  to  gold  alone,  as  primary  money, 
all  the  burdens  of  commerce  and  credit  formerly  borne  by  gold  and  silver, 
and  as  the  world's  stock  of  these  metals  has  always  been  about  equal  in 
amount,  it  means  the  doubling  of  the  burden  upon  gold.  Doubling  the  burden 
upon  gold  means  doubling  the  demand  for  the  same,  and  doubling  the  de- 
mand, of  necessity  doubles  the  value  thereof.  This  gradual  shifting  to  gold 
of  all  the  burdens  of  both  gold  and  silver  has  caused  a  gradual  and  steady 
increase  in  the  value  of  every  dollar  redeemable  in  gold,  and  hence  a  gradual 
and  steady  decline  in  the  value  of  every  commodity  that  is  measured  by  that 
dollar. 

The  representatives  and  supporters  of  Mr.  McKinley  consented  to  the  in- 
sertion in  the  St.  Louis  platform  of  the  gold  standard  declaration  thinly 
veneered  by  a  declaration  for  bimetallism,  "when  the  leading  commercial  nations 
of  the  world  should  consent,"  but  until  that  consent  was  secured  the  gold 
standard  must  be  maintained.  It  is  well  known  that  this  consent  cannot  be 
secured  from  Great  Britain,  and  that  such  declaration  for  bimetallism  means 
nothing  with  this  limitation  upon  it.  Mr.  McKinley  consented  to  the  declara- 
tion for  the  gold  standard  in  the  platform,  and  in  his  recent  speeches  has 
accepted  it,  and  has  become  the  advocate  thereof;  he  has  shown  by  his  speeches 
heretofore  made  that  he  understood  the  danger  of  the  gold  standard  and 
the  distress  which  would  be  inflicted  upon  the  American  people  by  its  adop- 
tion, and  yet  he  pledges  the  people  to  support  and  maintain  that 
system,  and  fasten  upon  them  all  the  evils  of  the  financial  system,  which 
he  has  heretofore  repudiated,  if  they  will  make  him  President.  Whatever  may 
have  been  his  attitude  on  the  money  question  in  the  past  he  must  inevitably 
hereafter  support  the  same  financial  system  that  the  present  Democratic  ad- 
ministration has,  and,  if  elected,  must  continue  the  policy  of  Mr.  Cleveland  in 
the  sale  of  bonds  in  time  of  peace.  Hence,  with  the  success  of  Mr.  McKinley 
we  may  look  for  a  continued  increase  of  the  public  debt  and  the  sale  of 
bonds  to  maintain  the  gold  standard. 

That  the  condition  of  the  country  is  not  satisfactory,  all  admit.  The 
producers  of  wealth  are  not  receiving  fair  and  proper  compensation  for  their 
labor,  whether  in  field,  factory  or  mine;  enterprise  has  ceased;  values  are  con- 
stantly declining;  labor  is  unemployed;  discontent  and  distress  prevail  to  an 
extent  never  before  known  in  the  history  of  this  country,  and  no  reason 
can  be  found  for  such  an  unhappy  condition  save  in  a  vicious  monetary  sys- 
tem. Those  who  profess  to  deplore  the  present  financial  condition  and  op- 
pose the  free  coinage  of  silver  are  divided  in  opinion  as  to  the  cause  of 
the  present  condition.  Some  declare  that  it  is  because  we  have  too  much 
tariff;  others  that  we  have  not  enough;  while  the  fact  exists  that  every  gold 
standard  country  in  the  world,  whether  it  has  a  high  or  a  low  tariff,  is  now 
and  has  been  during  recent  years,  in  the  throes  of  a  financial  panic;  and  every 
silver  standard  country,  compared  with  its  former  condition,  is  enjoying  an 
industrial    development    and    degree    of    prosperity    hitherto    unknown    in    its 

11 


Ido  THE  SILVER  REPUBLICANS. 

history.  While  thus  differing  in  opinion,  they  unite  in  asserting  that  the 
gold  standard  must  be  maintained  until  foreign  countries  shall  signify  their 
willingness  that  the  American  people  shall  exercise  the  rights  of  freemen 
and  create  a  financial  system  of  their  own.  If  we  overlook  the  humiliation 
and  degradation  we  must  feel  on  account  of  such  a  declaration  of  financial 
dependency,  we  may  well  inquire  when  the  consent  of  the  leading  commercial 
nations  will  be  obtained. 

No  one  who  has  read  the  proceedings  of  the  three  international  monetary 
conferences  that  have  already  been  held,  or  who  has  examined  the  imprac- 
ticable propositions  presented  at  those  conferences,  can  for  a  moment  believe 
that  any  international  bimetallic  agreement  can  ever  be  made  with  the  con- 
sent of  all  "the  leading  commercial  nations  of  the  world."  When  will 
Great  Britain,  controlled  as  she  is  and  ever  will  be  by  the  creditor  classes, 
who  collects  vast  sums  of  money  for  interest  due  her  and  her  citizens,  who 
buys  of  us  annually  many  more  millions  than  she  sells  to  us,  and  whose 
interest  it  is  to  make  the  pound  sterling  purchase  as  much  of  our  products 
as  possible,  consent  that  we  shall  be  financially  independent  as  we  are  supposed 
to  be  politically  independent?  When  did  the  creditor  classes  of  Great  Britain 
ever  give  up  or  in  any  way  yield  an  advantage  such  as  they  now  possess 
through  the  maintenance  of  the  gold  standard?  There  is  no  hope  for  in- 
ternational bimetallism  until  the  United  States  shall  establish  bimetallism  for 
itself,  and  when  that  is  done,  international  bimetallism  may  be  secured  without 
the  consent  of  Great  Britain.  The  United  States  on  all  other  subjects  of 
legislation  acts  independently  of  any  other  nation  on  earth.  By  what  pro- 
cess of  reasoning  is  its  right,  authority  or  ability  to  legislate  upon  this, 
the  most  important  subject  with  which  it  has  to  deal,  questioned  or  denied? 

With  a  nation  equal  in  wealth  and  power  to  one-fourth  of  the  world,  it  is 
cowardly  to  say  that  we  must  ask  the  permission  of  Great  Britain  to  es- 
tablish and  maintain  a  financial  policy  of  our  own.  Believing,  as  we  do,  that 
a  return  to  the  monetary  system  especially  recognized  in  the  Constitution 
and  completely  provided  for  by  law  from  1792  till  1873,  affords  the  only 
ground  of  hope  for  the  betterment  of  the  distressed  condition  of  all  the  classes 
except  those  who  live  by  the  increment  that  money  loaned  gives  to  those 
who  loan  it,  we  appeal  to  all  classes  to  rally  to  the  support  of  the  only 
candidates  whose  success  indicates  any  hope  of  relief. 

Let  the  merchant  and  business  man  whose  dwindling  and  lessened  profits 
have,  despite  his  care  and  economy,  brought  him  face  to  face  with  pros- 
pective bankruptcy  and  ruin,  the  professional  man,  whose  best  efforts  scarcely 
afford  him  compensation  for  his  labor  alone,  the  farmer,  the  continually  fall- 
ing prices  of  whose  products  have  left  him  no  returns  for  capital  invested  and 
work  performed,  and  last  but  not  least,  let  the  grand  army  of  laboring 
men  so  called,  the  artisan,  the  mechanic,  and  the  miner,  and  every  one  who 
depends  upon  his  daily  labor  for  his  daily  bread,  look  about  him  and  ob- 
serve the  great  number  of  those  who  vainly  seek  for  a  chance  to  work — 
upon  the  great  army  of  enforced  idlers — and  one  and  all  resolve  to  try, 
not  an  experiment  (for  bimetallism  is  not  an  experiment),  but  rather  a  return 
to  a  policy  that  throughout  the  vicissitudes  of  our  nation's  infancy,  through 
the  internecine  struggle  of  its  manhood  kept  us  a  great,  free  and  prosperous 


THE  SILVER  REPUBLICANS.  187 

nation,  in  which  labor  was  not  only  respected  and  employed,  but  was  so 
compensated  that  want  and  distress,  such  as  now  weigh  upon  us,  were 
unknown.  Let  the  lesson  of  history,  too  recent  and  too  plain  to  be  gain- 
said or  denied,  be  heeded,  and  let  there  be  no  fear  that  a  system  that  so  won- 
derfully protected  labor,  developed  business  enterprise  and  secured  to  the 
nation  a  contented  and  prosperous  people  in  the  past,  will  do  aught  but  bring 
to  us  a  return  of  like  prosperity,  the  prediction  of  disaster  of  our  opponents 
to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. 

In  Mr.  Bryan  the  Chicago  convention  placed  at  the  head  of  its  ticket  a 
gentleman  of  exceptional  ability  and  of  high  character.  No  man  of  his  age 
was  better  known  throughout  the  United  States  than  he.  A  member  of 
Congress  for  four  years,  he  commanded  the  admiration  and  respect  of  all 
his  associates  in  that  body  as  a  scholarly  statesman  and  profound  thinker. 
No  man  had  ever  assailed  his  character  or  in  any  way  questioned  his  in- 
tegrity or  moral  worth.  His  character  is  a  fit  example  for  the  young  men 
of  this  country.  He  has  shown  in  all  his  public  utterances  that  he  loves 
his  country  and  his  countrymen,  and  that  he  sympathizes  with  them  in  their 
distress.  He  has  also  shown  that  he  believed  the  financial  system  which  makes 
gold  the  standard  of  value  was  in  a  great  degree  the  cause  of  the  depression 
and  financial  distress  prevalent  throughout  the  land;  that  the  condition  now 
existing  will  continue  while  the  present  monetary  system  lasts,  and  that  he 
would  fain  return  to  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  they  were  used  prior 
to  1873,  and  he  has  proposed  such  a  change  of  the  financial  system  by  the 
usual  constitutional  methods. 

Such  was  the  character  and  such  the  political  opinions  of  the  candidate 
known  to  his  countrymen,  who  by  their  representatives  in  convention,  selected 
from  every  State  in  the  Union,  put  him  in  nomination  for  the  highest  office 
within  the  gift  of  the  American  people. 

This  is  a  critical  period  in  our  national  history.  Our  industrial  and 
financial  independence  of  other  nations  and  peoples  is  involved  in  this  cam- 
paign, and  we  firmly  believe  there  will  be  no  return  of  prosperity  until  we 
shall  have  changed  our  financial  system  so  as  to  restore  the  bimetallic  sys- 
tem established  by  the  fathers  of  the  Republic;  and  so  believing,  we  urge 
all  friends  of  gold  and  silver  as  standard  money  and  the  opponents  of  a 
single  gold  standard  to  give  to  Mr.  Bryan  and  Mr.  Sewall  their  hearty  sup- 
port. In  advising  this  course  we  do  not  consider  it  necessary  that  they  shall 
abandon  or  surrender  their  political  views  on  other  questions. 

Profoundly  impressed  with  the  importance  of  the  issues  of  this  cam- 
paign, for  ourselves  and  our  associates  we  respectfully  submit  the  foregoing 
to  the  candid  consideration  of  the  American  people. 


CHAPTER  IX. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

IN  pursuance  of  a  call  issued  by  the  Bimetallic  Democratic  National 
Committee,  the  leading  silver  Democrats  met  at  the  Sherman 
House  in  Chicago  on  June  30th,  for  the  purpose  of  deciding  upon 
the  course  to  be  pursued  in  the  National  Convention.  All  were 
agreed  that  it  was  both  wise  and  necessary  for  the  silver 
Democrats  to  secure  the  temporary  organization  and  control  the 
convention  at  every  step.  It  was  generally  understood  that 
the  National  Committee,  having  a  majority  against  silver,  would 
recommend  as  temporary  chairman  some  one  hostile  to  bi- 
metallism and  at  the  conference  it  was  decided  to  urge  the  minority 
of  the  committee  to  move  to  substitute  the  name  of  a  silver  Demo- 
crat for  the  name  to  be  suggested  by  the  majority  of  the  commit- 
tee. When  the  convention  was  called  to  order  this  plan  was  carried 
out.  The  committee,  through  its  chairman,  Hon.  William  F.  Har- 
rity,  recommended  Senator  David  B.  Hill,  of  New  York,  as  temporary 
chairman,  while  Hon.  Henry  D.  Clayton,  of  Alabama,  proposed  the 
name  of  Senator  John  W.  Daniel,  of  Virginia,  and  moved  that  his 
name  be  substituted  for  the  name  of  Senator  Hill.  Then  followed  a 
discussion  between  the  friends  of  the  two  candidates,  the  gold  Demo- 
crats insisting  that  it  was  contrary  to  precedent  and  discourteous  to 
the  committee  to  reject  its  recommendation,  while  the  silver  Demo- 
crats asserted  that  the  committee  should  have  respected  the  wishes 
of  the  convention,  whose  servant  it  was. 

As  the  National  Committee  had  seated  the  gold  delegation  from 
Nebraska,  I  was  present  during  the  temporary  organization  as  a  spec- 
tator only,  and  was  rather  amused  at  the  apparent  earnestness  with 
which  the  gold  men  begged  the  convention  not  to  humiliate  them 
by  turning  down  their  candidate;  the  very  obvious  answer  to  their 
argument  being  that  they  could  have  avoided  humiliation  by  recog- 
nizing the  right  of  the  majority  to  rule.  Upon  roll  call,  the  vote 
stood  556  for  Daniel,  and  349  for  Hill. 

On  taking  the  chair,  Senator  Daniel  paid  a  well-deserved  compli- 
ment to  Mr.  Harrity,  who  had  presided  at  a  very  trying  time  with 
perfect  fairness  and  impartiality.    I  give  Mr.  Daniel's  speech  in  full: 

188 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION.  189 

Mr.  Daniel's  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman  of  the  National  Democratic  Committee:  In  receiving  from 
your  hands  this  gavel  as  the  temporary  presiding  officer  of  this  convention, 
I  beg  leave  to  express  a  sentiment,  which  I  am  sure  is  unanimous,  that  no 
national  convention  was  ever  presided  over  with  more  ability  or  with  more 
fairness  than  by  yourself.  I  can  express  no  better  wish  for  myself  than  that 
I  may  be  able  in  some  feeble  fashion  to  model  my  conduct  by  your  model 
and  to  practice  by  your  example. 

Gentlemen:  The  high  position  to  which  you  have  chosen  me  is  accepted 
with  profound  gratitude  for  the  honor  which  it  confers  and  with  a  keen  sense 
of  the  responsibility  which  it  entails  upon  me. 

That  responsibility  I  would  be  wholly  inadequate  to  bear  did  I  depend  upon 
myself,  but  your  gracious  and  sympathetic  aid  can  make  its  yoke  easy  and  its 
burden  light.  That  aid  I  confidently  invoke  for  the  sake  of  the  great  cause 
under  whose  banner  we  have  fought  so  many  battles  and  which  now  demands 
our  stanch  devotion  and  loyal  service. 

I  regret  that  my  name  should  have  been  brought  in  even  the  most  cour- 
teous competition  with  that  of  my  distinguished  friend  the  great  Senator  from 
New  York,  but  he  will  readily  recognize  the  fact  as  I  do,  that  there  is  no  per- 
sonality in  the  preferment  given  me.  He  must  know  as  we  all  do  that  it  is 
solely  due  to  the  principle  that  this  great  majority  of  Democrats  stands  for  and 
that  I  stand  for  with  them;  and  that  it  is  given,  too,  in  the  spirit  of  the  instruc- 
tions received  by  these  representatives  of  the  people  from  the  people  whom 
all  Democrats  bow  to  as  the  original  and  purest  fountain  of  all  power. 

The  birth  of  the  Democratic  party  was  coeval  with  the  birth  of  the  sov- 
ereignty of  the  people.  It  can  never  die  until  the  Declaration  of  American 
Independence  is  forgotten,  and  that  sovereignty  is  dethroned  and  extinguished. 

As  the  majority  of  the  convention  is  not  personal  in  its  aims,  neither  is  it 
sectional.  It  begins  with  the  sunrise  in  Maine  and  spreads  into  a  sunburst 
in  Louisiana  and  Texas.  It  stretches  in  unbroken  line  across  the  continent 
from  Virginia  and  Georgia  to  California.  It  sends  forth  its  pioneers  from 
Plymouth  Rock  and  waves  the  palmetto  in  South  Carolina.  It  has  its  strong- 
holds in  Alabama  and  Mississippi  and  its  outposts  in  Delaware  and  Minnesota, 
Florida  and  Oregon.  It  sticks  like  a  tar  heel  in  the  old  north  State  and 
writes  i6  to  i  on  the  saddle  bags  of  the  Arkansas  Traveler.  It  pours  down 
its  rivulets  from  the  mountains  of  New  Hampshire  and  West  Virginia  and 
makes  a  great  lake  in  New  Mexico,  Arizona,  Wyoming  and  Idaho,  Montana 
and  Colorado.  It  stands  guard  around  the  National  Capitol  in  the  District  of 
Columbia  and  taps  at  the  door  in  far  ofif  Washington.  It  sweeps  like  a  prairie 
fire  over  Iowa  and  Kansas  and  lights  up  the  horizon  in  Nebraska.  It  mar- 
shals its  massive  battalions  in   Ohio,   Indiana,   Illinois  and   Missouri. 

Last  but  not  least,  when  I  see  this  grand  array  and  think  of  the  British 
gold  standard  that  recently  was  unfurled  over  the  ruins  of  Republican  promises 
at  St.  Louis,  I  think,  too,  of  the  battle  of  New  Orleans  of  which  'tis  said 
There  stood  John  Bull  in  martial  pomp, 
But  there   was  old    Kentucky. 

Brethren  of  the  East  there  is  no  North.  South,  East  or  West  in  this  upris- 
ing of  the  people  for  American  emancipation  from  the  conspiracy  of  European 


190  THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

kings  led  by  Great  Britain,  whicti  seeks  to  destroy  one  half  of  the  money  of 
the  world,  and  to  make  American  manufacturers,  merchants,  farmers  and 
mechanics  hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of  water. 

But  there  is  one  thing  golden  that  let  me  commend  to  you.  It  is  the 
golden  rule  to  do  unto  others  as  you  would  have  them  do  unto  you.  Remem- 
ber the  creed  of  Jefferson  that  absolute  acquiescence  in  the  will  of  the  majority 
is  the  vital  principle  of  the  Republic,  and  Democrats  as  you  have  been,  Demo- 
crats that  you  should  be,  acquiesce  now  in  the  will  of  this  great  majority  of 
your  fellow  Democrats  who  only  ask  you  to  go  with  them  as  they  have  often 
gone  with  you. 

Do  not  forget  that  for  thirty  years  we  have  supported  the  men  that  you 
named  for  President — Seymour,  Greeley,  Tilden,  Hancock  and  Cleveland.  Do 
not  forget  that  we  have  submitted  graciously  to  your  compromise  platforms 
and  to  your  repeated  pledges  for  bimetallism  and  have  patiently  borne  repeated 
disappointments  as  to  their  fulfillment. 

Do  not  forget  that  even  in  the  last  national  convention  of  1892  you  pro- 
claimed yourselves  to  be-in  favor  of  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  the 
standard  money  of  the  country  and  for  the  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver 
without  discrimination  against  either  metal  or  charge  for  mintage,  and  that 
the  only  question  left  open  was  the  ratio  between  the  metals. 

Do  not  forget  that  just  four  years  ago  in  that  same  convention  the  New 
York  delegation  stood  here  solid  and  immovable  for  a  candidate  committed 
to  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  and  gold  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i ; 
and  that  if  we  are  for  it  still  it  is  in  some  measure  from  your  teachings. 

That  we  owe  you  much  is  readily  acknowledged  and  gratefully  acknowl- 
edged, but  are  not  our  debts  mutual  and  not  one  sided  as  to  each  other? 

The  Force  bill,  the  McKinley  bill  and  the  Sherman  law  were  the  triplet 
progeny  of  the  Republican  party.  The  first  was  aimed  not  more  at  the  South 
than  at  the  great  cities  of  the  East,  and  chief  among  them  at  the  great  Demo- 
cratic city  of  New  York  with  its  munificent  patronage.  It  got  its  death  blow 
in  the  Senate  where  there  was  not  a  single  Democratic  vote  from  New  York 
and  all  New  England.  If  you  helped  to  save  the  South  it  also  helped  to  save 
you,  and  neither  the  East  nor  the  South  could  have  saved  itself  had  not  those 
great  Amwican  Republican  Senators  from  the  West,  Teller  and  Wolcott,  Stew- 
art, Jones  and  Stanford,  sunk  partisanry  in  patriotism  and  come  to  the  rescue 
of  American  institutions.  No  man  can  revive  Force  bills  now  in  this  glorious 
reconciled  and  reunited  Republic.  Our  opponents  themselves  have  abandoned 
them;  there  is  none  that  can  stand  between  the  union  of  hearts  and  hands  that 
Grant  in  his  dying  vision  saw  was  coming  on  angels'  wings  to  all  the  sons  of 
our  common  country. 

When  Chicago  dressed  with  flowers  the  Southern  graves  she  buried  sec- 
tionalism under  a  mountain  of  fragrance;  and  when  the  Southern  soldiers 
cheered  but  yesterday  the  wounded  hero  of  the  North  in  Richmond,  she 
answered  back,  let  us  have  peace — peace  and  union  and  liberty  forever. 

As  this  majority  of  Democrats  is  not  sectional  neither  is  it  for  any  privilege 
of  class  or  for  class  legislation.  The  active  business  men  of  this  country,  its 
manufacturers,  its  merchants,  its  farmers,  its  sons  of  toil  in  counting  room, 
factory,  field  and  mine,  know  that  a  contraction  of  the  currency  sweeps  away 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION.  191 

with  tlie  silent  and  relentless  force  of  gravitation  the  annual  profits  of  their 
enterprise  and  investment,  and  they  know  too  that  the  gold  standard  means 
contraction  and  the  organization  of  disaster. 

What  hope  is  there  for  the  country,  what  hope  for  Democracy  unless  the 
views  of  the  majority  here  be  adopted? 

Do  not  the  people  know  that  it  was  not  silver  legislation  but  the  legisla- 
tion dictated  by  the  advocates  of  the  gold  standard  that  has  caused  and  now 
continues  the  financial  depression?  Do  they  not  know  that  when  their  demands 
upon  Democracy  were  complied  with  in  1893  and  the  Sherman  law  repealed 
without  a  substitute,  that  the  very  States  of  the  East  that  demanded  it  turned 
against  the  Democrats  who  granted  it  and  swept  away  their  majorities  in  a 
torrent  of  ballots.  Had  the  silver  men  had  their  way  instead  of  the  gold 
monometallists,  what  storms  of  abuse  would  now  burst  here  upon  their  heads! 

But  the  people  are  now  applying  the  power  of  memory  and  analysis  to  dis- 
cover the  causes  of  their  arrested  prosperity  and  they  need  not  go  far  to  find 
them. 

They  do  not  forget  that  when  Democracy  came  to  power  in  1893  it  inher- 
ited from  its  Republican  predecessors  a  tax  system  and  a  currency  system  of 
which  the  McKinley  law  and  the  Sherman  law  were  the  culminating  atrocities. 
It  came  amidst  the  panic  which  quickly  followed  their  enactment — amongst 
decreased  wages,  strikes,  lock-outs,  riots  and  civic  commotions,  while  the 
scenes  of  peaceful  industry  in  Pennsylvania  had  been  turned  into  military  camps. 
Besides  manifold  oppressive  features  the  McKinley  law  had  thrown  away 
$50,000,000  of  revenue  tax  derived  from  sugar  under  the  spectral  plea  of  a  free 
breakfast  table,  and  had  substituted  bounties  to  sugar  planters,  thus  decreasing 
revenue  and  increasing  expenditure,  and  making  the  people  pay  at  past  for  the 
alleged  free  breakfast.  From  the  joint  operations  of  the  McKinley  law  and 
Sherman  law  an  adverse  balance  of  trade  had  been  forced  against  us  in  1893 — 
a  surplus  of  $100,000,000  in  the  Treasury  had  been  converted  into  a  deficit  of 
seventy  million  in  1894  before  yet  a  Democratic  statute  had  come  into  oper- 
ation, and  engraved  bonds  prepared  by  a  Republican  Secretary  to  borrow 
money  to  support  the  Government  were  the  ill  omens  of  the  pre-organized  ruin 
which  awaited  incoming  Democracy  at  a  depleted  Treasury. 

More  significant  still,  the  very  authors  of  the  ill  starred  and  ill  concocted 
Sherman  makeshift  were  already  at  confessional  and  upon  the  stool  of  pene- 
tance,  and  were  begging  help  from  Democrats  to  put  out  the  conflagration  of 
disaster  which  they  themselves  had  incited. 

So  far  as  revenue  to  support  the  Government  is  concerned,  the  Democratic 
party,  with  but  a  slender  majority  in  the  Senate,  was  not  long  in  providing  it, 
and  had  not  t-he  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  reversed  its  settled  doc- 
trines of  a  hundred  years  the  income  tax,  incorporated  in  their  tariff  bill, 
would  long  since  have  supplied  the  deficit. 

Respecting  finance,  the  Republican,  Populist  and  Democratic  parties, 
while  dififering  upon  other  subjects,  had  alike  declared  for  the  restoration  of  our 
American  system  of  bimetallism. 

By  Republican  and  Democratic  votes  alike  the  Sherman  law  was  swept 
from  the  statute  books,  the  eagerness  to  rid  the  country  of  that  Republican 
incubus  being  so  great  that  no  pause  was  made  to  provide  its  substitute.     But 


192  THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

in  the  very  act  of  its  repeal  it  was  solemnly  declared  to  be  the  policy  of  the 
United  States  to  continue  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  standard  money 
and  to  coin  them  into  dollars  of  equal  intrinsic  and  exchangeable  value. 

The  Republican  party  has  now  renounced  the  creed  of  its  platforms  and  of 
our  statutes.  It  has  presented  to  the  country  the  issue  of  higher  taxes,  more 
bonds  and  less  money. 

We  can  only  expect,  should  they  succeed,  new  spasms  of  panic  and  a  long 
protracted  period  of  depression.  Do  not  ask  us  then  to  join  them  on  any  of 
these  propositions.  Least  of  all,  ask  us  not  to  join  them  upon  the  money  ques- 
tion to  fight  a  sham  battle  over  the  settled  tariff,  for  the  money  question  is  the 
one  paramount  issue  before  the  people,  and  it  involves  true  Americanism  more 
than  any  economic  issue  ever  presented  to  the  people  at  a  presidential  election. 

Existing  gold  standard?  Whence  come  the  idea  that  we  are  upon  it.  Not 
from  the  Democratic  platform  of  1892,  which  promised  to  hold  us  to  the  double 
one.  Not  from  the  last  enactment  of  Congress  on  the  subject  in  repealing  the 
Sherman  law,  which  pledges  us  to  the  continuance  of  the  double  one.  Not  from 
any  statute  of  the  United  States  in  force.  No,  we  are  not  upon  any  gold 
standard,  but  we  have  a  disordered  and  miscellaneous  currency,  of  nine  varie- 
ties, three  of  metal  and  six  of  paper,  the  product  for  the  most  part  of  Republican 
legislation,  rendered  worse  by  treasury  practices  begun  by  Republican  secre- 
taries and  unfortunately  copied  by  the  Democratic  administration. 

And  consider  these  facts.  The  Federal,  State  and  municipal  taxes  are 
assessed  and  paid  by  the  standard  of  the  whole  mass  of  money  in  circulation. 
No  authority  has  ever  been  conferred  by  Congress  for  the  issue  of  bonds  pay- 
able in  gold,  but  distinctly  refused.  The  specie  resumption  act  of  1875  niade  the 
surplus  revenue  in  the  Treasury,  not  gold  only,  the  redemption  fund.  Before 
the  period  for  the  operation  of  that  act  arrived,  provision  was  made  by  the  Bland- 
Allison  act  which  has  added  to  our  circulation  some  three  hundred  and  fifty 
millions  of  standard  silver  money  or  paper  based  upon  it,  and  they  ar^  sustained 
at  parity  with  gold  by  nothing  on  earth  but  the  metal  in  them  and  their  legal 
tender  functions.  We  have  no  outstanding  obligations  payable  in  gold  except 
the  small  sum  of  forty-four  million  of  gold  certificates,  which,  of  course,  should 
be  so  paid.  All  of  our  special  obligations  are  payable  in  coin,  which  means  silver 
or  gold  at  government  option,  or  in  silver  only.  There  is  more  silver  or  paper 
based  upon  it  in  circulation  than  there  is  in  gold  or  paper  based  on  gold.  And 
that  gold  dollars  are  not  the  sole  units  of  value  is  demonstrated  by  the  fact 
that  no  gold  dollar  pieces  whatever  are  now  minted. 

If  we  should  go  upon  the  gold  standard  it  is  evident  that  we  must 
change  the  existing  bimetallic  standard  of  payment  of  all  public  debts,  taxes 
and  appropriations,  save  those  specifically  payable  in  gold  only..  As  we  have 
twenty  billions  of  public  and  private  debt,  it  would  take  more  than  three 
times  all  the  gold  in  the  country  to  pay  one  year's  interest  in  that  medium. 

We  should  be  compelled  hereafter  to  contract  the  currency  by  paying 
the  five  hundred  millions  of  greenbacks  and  Sherman  notes  in  gold,  which 
would  nearly  exhaust  the  entire  American  stock  in  and  out  of  the  Treasury, 
and  the  same  policy  would  require  that  the  three  hundred  and  forty-four 
millions  of  silver  certificates  should  be  paid  in  gold  as  foreshadowed  by  the 
present  Director  of  the  Mint  in  his  recommendation. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION.  193 

This  means  the  increase  of  the  public  debt  by  five  hundred  millions  of 
interest  bearing  gold  bonds  with  the  prospect  of  three  hundred  and  forty -four 
millions  to  follow. 

The  disastrous  consequences  of  such  a  policy  are  appalling  to  contem- 
plate, and  the  only  alternative  suggested  is  the  free  coinage  of  silver  as 
well  as  gold  and  the  complete  restoration  of  our  American  system  of  bi- 
metallism. 

Bring  us,  we  pray  you,  no  more  makeshifts  and  straddlers.  Vex  the 
country  with  no  more  prophecies  of  smooth  things  to  come  from  the  British- 
Republican  gold  propaganda. 

The  fact  that  European  nations  are  going  to  the  gold  standard  renders  it 
all  the  more  impracticable  for  us  to  do  so,  for  the  limited  stock  of  gold  would 
have  longer  division  and  a  smaller  share  for  each  nation. 

Remember  how  previous  predictions  made  when  the  unconditional  repeal 
of  the  Sherman  law  cut  off  silver  have  been  refuted. 

Instead  of  protecting  the  Treasury  reserve  as  was  proclaimed  it  would 
do,  an  unprecedented  raid  was  promptly  made  upon  it,  and  two  hundred  and 
sixty-two  millions  of  borrowed  gold  have  been  insufficient  to  guarantee  its 
security. 

Instead  of  causing  foreign  capital  to  flow  to  us,  it  has  stimulated  the 
flow  of  gold  to  Europe  and  the  greenback  notes  and  the  Sherman  notes, 
which  are  just  as  much  payable  in  silver  as  in  gold,  have  been  used  to  dip 
the  gold  out  of  the  Treasury  and  pour  it  into  the  strong  boxes  of  the  war 
lords  of  Europe. 

Instead  of  reviving  business,  this  policy  has  further  depressed  it.  In- 
stead of  increasing  wages  this  policy  has  further  decreased  them.  Instead  of 
multiplying  opportunities  for  employment,  this  policy  has  multiplied  idlers 
who  cannot  get  it.  Instead  of  increasing  the  prices  of  our  produce,  this 
policy  has  lowered  them  as  is  estimated  about  fifteen  per  cent,  in  three 
years.  Instead  of  restoring  confidence,  this  policy  has  banished  confidence. 
Instead  of  bringing  relief,  it  has  brought  years  of  misery,  and  for  obvious 
reasons.  It  has  contracted  the  currency  folir  dollars  a  head  for  every  man, 
woman  and  child  in  the  United  States  since  November  i,  1893.  And  with 
this  vast  aggregate  contraction  the  prices  of  land  and  manufactured 
goods  and  of  all  kinds  of  agricultural  and  mechanical  produce  have  fallen, 
the  public  revenues  have  fallen,  the  wages  of  labor  have  fallen,  and  everything 
has  fallen  but  taxes  and  debts,  which  have  grown  in  burden,  while  on  the 
other  hand  the  means  of  payment  have  diminished  in  value.  Meantime,  com- 
mercial failures  have  progressed.     The  dividends  of  banks  have  shrunken. 

Three-fourths  of  our  railway  mileage  have  gone  into  the  hands  of  the 
receivers  and  the  country  has  received  a  shock  from  which  it  will  take  many 
years  to  recover.  In  this  condition  the  new-fledged  monometallists  ask  us 
to  declare  for  a  gold  standard,  and  wait  for  relief  upon  some  ghostly  dream 
of  international  agreement. 

But  the  people  well  know  how  the  conspiracy  of  European  monarchs,  led 
by  Great  Britain,  has  purposes  of  aggrandizement  to  subserve  in  the  war  upon 
American  silver  money,  and  stand  in  the  way  of  such  agreement.  They  arc 
creditor  nations,  and  seek  to  enhance  the  purchasing  power  of  the  thousands 


194  THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION 

of  millions  of  debt  owed  to  them  over  the  world,  and  much  of  which  we 
owe.  They  draw  upon  us  for  much  of  their  food  supplies  and  raw  ma- 
terials; for  meat,  wheat,  corn,  oil,  cotton,  wool,  iron,  lead  and  the  like 
staples,  and  seek  to  get  them  for  the  least  money.  Besides  this,  Great 
Britain  has  large  gold  mines  in  South  America,  Australia  and  South  Africa, 
and  by  closing  our  silver  mines  has  greatly  enhanced  their  value  and  their 
products.  Recent  British  aggressions  against  Venezuela  and  the  settlements 
in  South  Africa  were  moved  by  the  desire  to  add  to  the  possession  of  gold 
mines,  and  by  monopolizing  that  metal  as  far  as  possible,  to  assert  the  com- 
mercial supremacy  of  the  world. 

No  nation  can  call  itself  independent  that  cannot  establish  a  financial  sys- 
tem of  its  own.  We  abhor  the  pretense  that  this,  the  foremost,  richest  and 
most  powerful  nation  of  the  world,  cannot  coin  its  own  money  without 
suing  for  international  agreement  at  the  courts  of  European  autocrats,  who, 
having  their  primary  interests  to  subserve,  have  for  many  years  held  out  to 
us  the  idea  before  every  presidental  election  that  they  would  enter  upon  such 
an  agreement  and  foiled  every  effort  to  obtain  it  afterward. 

We  have  never  had  an  international  agreement  about  our  money  system 
with  foreign  nations,  and  none  of  the  founders  of  the  Republic  ever  dreamed 
that  such  an  agreement  was  essential.  We  have  had  three  international  con- 
ferences with  European  powers  in  order  to  obtain  it,  and  to  wait  longer 
upon  them  is  to  ignore  the  people's  interest,  to  degrade  our  national  dig- 
nity and  to  advertise  our  impotence  and  folly. 

The  concession  that  the  scientific  thought  of  the  world  is  for  the 
double  standard  as  the  only  solution  of  financial  difficulty  is  a  concession 
that  wisdom  far  and  wide  cheers  us  on.  The  declaration  that  the  English 
Commons,  the  Prussian  Diet  and  French  Minister  of  Finance  have  recently 
expressed  themselves  in  its  favor  shows  that  it  would  succeed  if  not  sup- 
pressed by  the  sinister  influences  of  autocratic  power. 

The  concession  that  international  agreement  could  restore  the  metals  to 
equality  and  that  such  restoration  would  be  a  boon  to  mankind,  is  a  con- 
cession that  law  regulates  the  value  of  money,  and  that  the  bimetallists  are 
right  in  their  theories  of  a  double  standard. 

The  framers  of  our  Constitution  knew  this  when  they  gave  power  to 
Congress  to  coin  money  and  regulate  the  value  thereof  and  of  foreign 
coins,  and  when  they  prohibited  the  States  from  making  anything  but  gold 
and  silver  legal  tender.  Hamilton  knew  this  when  he  framed  the  first  mint 
act  of  1792,  and  based  the  unit  of  our  currency  upon  both  metals  for  the 
double  reason  assigned  by  him  that  to  exclude  one  would  reduce  it  to  a  mere 
merchandise  and  involve  the  difference  between  a  full  and  a  scanty  circulation. 
Jefferson  knew  this  when  he  indorsed  the  work  of  Hamilton  and  Washing- 
ton when  he  approved  it.  Daniel  Webster  knew  this  when  he  declared  that 
gold  and  silver  were  our  legal  standard  and  that  neither  Congress  nor  any 
State  had  the  right  to  establish  any  other  standard  or  displace  this  standard. 
General  Grant  knew  this  when  he  looked  to  silver  as  a  resource  of  pay- 
ment and  found  to  his  astonishment  that  a  Republican  Congress  had  demone- 
tized it,  and  that  he,  as  President,  had  unwittingly  signed  the  bill.  The  peo- 
ple of  the  United  States  know  this  now  and  know  also  that  "they  who  would 
be  free  themselves  must  strike  the  .blow." 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION.  195 

We  maintain  that  this  great  nation,  with  a  natural  base,  as  Gladstone 
said,  of  the  greatest  continuous  empire  ever  established  by  man,  with  far 
more  territory  and  more  productive  energy  than  Great  Britain,  France  and 
Germany  combined,  without  dependence  upon  Europe  for  anything  that  it 
produces  and  with  European  dependence  upon  us  for  much  that  we  pro- 
duce, is  fully  capable  of  restoring  its  constitutional  money  system  of  gold  and 
silver  at  equality  with  each  other.  And  as  our  fathers  in  1776  declared  our 
national  independence,  so  now  has  the  party  founded  by  Thomas  Jefferson, 
the  author  of  that  declaration,  met  here  to  declare  our  financial  independence 
of  all  other  nations,  and  to  invoke  all  true  Americans  to  assert  it  by  their  votes 
and  place  their  country  where  it  of  right  belongs  as  the  greatest,  noblest 
and  foremost  nation  that  blesses  the  life  of  mankind  on  this  globe. 

Hon.  John  H.  Atwood,  of  Kansas,  was  made  chairman  of  the 
Committee  on  Credentials,  and  discharged  the  duties  of  the  position 
with  great  ability.  The  contests  before  the  committee  involved  the 
entire  Nebraska  delegation,  and  a  portion  of  the  Michigan  delegation. 
The  committee  reported  with  practical  unanimity  in  favor  of  seating 
the  delegation  of  which  I  was  a  member,  in  place  of  the  delegation 
sent  by  the  bolting  organization  of  gold  Democrats.  The  convention 
adopted,  without  division,  the  report  upon  the  Nebraska  contest  and 
our  delegates  were  escorted  to  seats  in  the  convention.  The  commit- 
tee brought  in  a  majority  and  a  minority  report  on  the  Michigan  con- 
test, the  majority  report  being  adopted  by  a  vote  which  ran  sub- 
stantially along  the  line  of  the  Daniel-Hill  vote.  While  the  con- 
vention was  waiting  for  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Credentials, 
speeches  were  made  by  a  number  of  prominent  delegates,  among 
them  ex-Governor  Hogg  of  Texas,  Senator  Blackburn  of  Kentucky, 
Governor  Altgeld  of  Illinois,  and  ex-Congressman  George  Fred  Wil- 
liams of  Massachusetts.  Mr.  Hogg's  work  has  entitled  him  to  a  fore- 
most place  among  the  Democrats  of  the  nation,  and  the  convention 
early  showed  its  partiality  for  him.  Mr.  Altgeld  was  a  prime  factor  in 
the  fight  waged  by  the  silver  Democrats  for  the  capture  of  the  party 
organization.  As  he  was  the  recognized  leader  of  his  party  in  the  great- 
est State  of  the  West,  his  support  was  necessary  in  order  to  secure  a 
victory  for  silver  in  the  National  Convention.  He  not  only  gave  to  the 
cause  his  great  personal  influence,  but  during  the  ante-convention 
campaign  delivered  several  strong  speeches,  principal  among  which 
was  his  reply  to  Mr.  Carlisle's  Chicago  speech. 

The  Committee  on  Permanent  Organization  recommended  the  se- 
lection of  Senator  Stephen  M.  White,  of  California,  as  permanent  chair- 
man of  the  convention,  and  the  report  was  adopted  without  division. 


196  THE  DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

Mr.  White  has  for  many  years  been  a  most  indefatigable,  as  well  as 
able,  champion  of  bimetallism.    Upon  taking  the  chair  he  said: 

Mr.  White's  Speech. 

Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  I  will  detain  you  with  no  extended  speech. 
The  Democratic  party  is  here  represented  by  delegates  who  have  come  from 
the  Atlantic  and  Pacific  shores.  Every  State  has  its  full  quota;  every  State, 
so  far  as  I  can  bring  about  such  a  result,  shall  have  full,  equal,  absolute  and 
impartial  treatment  from  this  stand.  Every  State  is  entitled  to  such  treatment; 
every  question  should  be  considered  carefully  and  deliberately,  and  when  the 
voice  of  this  convention  is  crystallized  into  a  judgment  it  should  be  binding 
upon  all  true  Democratic  members  of  this  convention. 

We  differ,  perhaps,  today  upon  certain  vital  issues,  and  we  might  express 
some  feelings  of  bitterness  in  these  discussions,  but  we  submit  to  the  voice  and 
the  candid  judgment  of  our  brethren,  and  upon  that  judgment  we  will  certainly 
rely.  Time  passes  as  we  stand  here;  it  leaves  many  with  unsatisfied  ambition. 
It  leaves  numerous  aspirations  and  hopes  unrealized.  Men  now  prominent 
will  pass  away — some  to  oblivion  while  they  live — and  others,  because  they  have 
been  summoned  to  another  shore;  but  the  Democratic  party  v/ill  not  die,  even 
when  we  all  have  ceased  to  live. 

When  the  diflferences  which  challenge  consideration  tonight  have  passed 
into  history,  when  the  asperities  of  this  hour  no  longer  obtain,  the  Democratic 
party,  the  guardian  of  the  people's  rights  and  the  representative  of  the  senti- 
ments of  the  United  States  in  support  of  Constitutional  right,  will  endure  to 
bless  mankind. 

My  ambition  or  yours  is  of  but  little  moment.  Whether  I  succeed,  or  you, 
in  impressing  sentiments  upon  this  convention  is  not  of  supreme  importance. 
In  this  council  chamber  the  Democratic  party  looks  for  an  indication  of  its 
existence.  The  people  seek  here  the  righting  of  their  wrongs,  and  the  Consti- 
tution— the  great  charter  of  our  liberties — here  must  find  its  best,  its  truest  and 
its  most  loyal  defenders.  No  sectionalism  whatever;  equal,  impartial  justice 
to  all  in  this  land;  the  triumph  of  the  people's  cause,  as  here  exemplified  and 
expressed,  is  the  object  for  which  we  have  assembled,  and  to  carry  out  that 
object  I  will  consecrate  my  best  exertions. 


CHAPTER  X. 


A 


CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM. 

S  THE  adoption  of  the  platform  was  the  rock  upon  which  the 
convention  split,  I  give  below  the  names  of  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions: 


Senator  James  K.  Jones,  of  Arkansas,    Irving  W.  Drew,  New  Hampshire. 


Chairman. 
John   H.   Blankhead,   Alabama. 
Stephen  M.   White,   California. 
C.  S.  Thomas,  Colorado. 
Lynde   Harrison,    Connecticut. 
George  Gray,  Delaware. 
R.    A.    Davis,    Florida. 
Evan  P.  Howell,   Georgia. 

B.  N.  Hillard,  Idaho. 

N.  E.  Worthington,  Illinois. 

James  McCabe,  Indiana. 

J.  S.  Murphy,  Iowa. 

J.  D.  McCleverty,  Kansas. 

P.  W.  Hardin,  Kentucky. 

S.   M.   Robertson,   Louisiana. 

C.  V.  Holman,  Maine. 

John  Prentiss  Poe,  Maryland. 
J.  E.  Russell,  Massachusetts. 
George  P.  Hummer,  Michigan. 
James  E.  O'Brien,  Minnesota. 
J.  Z.  George,  Mississippi. 
F.    M.    Cockrell,    Missouri. 
E.  D.  Matts,  Montana. 
W.  J.  Bryan,  Nebraska. 
T.  W.  Healy,  Nevada. 


Allen  McDermott,  New  Jersey. 
David  B.  Hill,  New  York. 
E.  J.  Hale,  North  Carolina. 
W.   N.   Roach,   North   Dakota. 
Allen  W.  Thurman,  Ohio. 
M.  A.  Miller,  Oregon. 
R.    E.   Wright,    Pennsylvania. 
David  S.  Baker,  Rhode  Island. 

B.  R.  Tillman,  South  Carolina. 
W.  R.  Steele,  South  Dakota. 
A.  T.  McNeil,  Tennessee. 
John  H.  Reagan,  Texas. 

J.  L.  Rawlins,  Utah. 

P.  J.  Farrell,  Vermont. 

Carter    Glass,    Virginia. 

R.  C.  McCroskey,  Washington. 

W.  M.  Kincaid,  West  Virginia. 

William  F.  Vilas,  Wisconsin. 

C.  W.  Brumel,  Wyoming. 
Chas.  D.  Rogers,  Alaska. 
W.  H.  Barnes,  Arizona. 

R.  E.  Mattingley,  District  of  Columbia. 
R.  L.   Owen,   Indian  Territory. 
A.  A.  Jones,  New  Mexico. 
M.  L.  Bixler,  Oklahoma. 


From  the  first  assembling  of  the  Platform  Committee  it  became 
evident  that  there  could  be  no  agreement.  The  differences  between 
the  delegates  upon  the  money  question  were  so  radical  and  the  con- 
victions so  deep  that  compromise  was  impossible.  A  large  majority 
of  the  delegates  had  come  instructed  for  a  platform  declaring  for 
free  and  unlimited  coinage  at  i6  to  i,  while  a  minority  of  the  delegates 
were  instructed  to  oppose  such  a  declaration.  The  majority  prepared 
their  money  plank  and  the  minority  theirs,  and  the  contest  was  trans- 

197 


19b  CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM. 

{erred  to  the  convention.  Senator  Jones,  the  chairman  of  the  commit- 
tee, presented  the  majority  report,  and  the  platform  as  read  by  him 
was  adopted.  As  I  shall  set  it  forth  in  full  in  a  subsequent  chapter, 
I  shall  not  quote  from  it  here.  The  minority  report  was  signed  by 
Messrs.  David  B.  Hill,  William  F.  Vilas,  George  Gray,  John  Prentiss 
Poe,  Irving  W.  Drew,  C.  V.  Holman,  P.  J.  Farrell,  William  R.  Steele, 
Allen  McDermott,  Lynde  Harrison,  David  S.  Baker,  Thomas  A.  E. 
Weadock,  James  E.  O'Brien,  John  E.  Russell,  Robert  E.  Wright,  and 
Charles  D.  Rogers.  (Mr.  Weadock,  who  signed  the  minority  report, 
was  replaced  by  Mr.  Hummer,  after  the  Michigan  contest  was  decided. 
The  latter  supported  the  majority  report.) 

The  report  and  substitute  recommended  read  as  follows : 

To  the  Democratic  National  Convention:  Sixteen  delegates,  constituting 
the  minority  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions,  find  many  declarations  in  the 
report  of  the  majority  to  which  they  cannot  give  their  assent.  Some  of  these 
are  wholly  unnecessary.  Some  are  ill  considered  and  ambiguously  phrased, 
while  others  are  extreme  and  revolutionary  of  the  well  recognized  principles  of 
the  party.  The  minority  content  themselves  with  this  general  expression  of 
their  dissent,  without  going  into  a  specific  statement  of  these  objectionable 
features  of  the  report  of  the  majority;  but  upon  the  financial  question,  which 
engages  at  this  time  the  chief  share  of  public  attention,  the  views  of  the  majority 
differ  so  fundamentally  from  what  the  minority  regard  as  vital  Democratic  doc- 
trine as  to  demand  a  distinct  statement  of  what  they  hold  to  as  the  only  just 
and  true  expression  of  Democratic  faith  upon  this  paramount  issue,  as  follows, 
which  is  offered  as  a  substitute  for  the  financial  plank  in  the  majority  report: 

"We  declare  our  belief  that  the  experiment  on  the  part  of  the  United  States 
alone  of  free  silver  coinage  and  a  change  of  the  existing  standard  of  value 
independently  of  the  action  of  other  great  nations,  would  not  only  imperil  our 
finances,  but  would  retard  or  entirely  prevent  the  establishment  of  international 
bimetallism,  to  which  the  efforts  of  the  Government  should  be  steadily  directed. 
It  would  place  this  country  at  once  upon  a  silver  basis,  impair  contracts,  dis- 
turb business,  diminish  the  purchasing  power  of  the  wages  of  labor,  and  inflict 
irreparable  evils  upon  our  nation's  commerce  and  industry. 

"Until  international  co-operation  among  leading  nations  for  the  coinage  of 
silver  can  be  secured  we  favor  the  rigid  maintenance  of  the  existing  gold  stand- 
ard as  essential  to  the  preservation  of  our  national  credit,  the  redemption  of  our 
public  pledges,  and  the  keeping  inviolate  of  our  country's  honor.  We  insist 
that  all  our  paper  and  silver  currency  shall  be  kept  absolutely  at  a  parity  with 
gold.  The  Democratic  party  is  the  party  of  hard  money  and  is  opposed  to 
legal  tender  paper  money  as  a  part  of  our  permanent  financial  system,  and  we 
therefore  favor  the  gradual  retirement  and  cancellation  of  all  United  States 
notes  and  Treasury  notes,  under  such  legislative  provisions  as  will  prevent 
undue  contraction.  We  demand  that  the  national  credit  shall  be  resolutely 
maintained  at  all  times  and  under  all  circumstances." 

The  minority  also  feel  that  the  report  of  the  majority  is  defective  in  failing 


CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM.  19^ 

to  make  any  recognition  of  the  honesty,  economy,  courage  and  fidelity  of  the 
present  Democratic  administration.  And  they  therefore  oflfer  the  following 
declaration  as  an  amendment  to  the  majority  report: 

"We  commend  the  honesty,  economy,  courage  and  fidelity  of  the  present 
Democratic  National  Administration." 

The  debate  was  opened  by  Senator  Tillman,  who  supported  the 
platform  reported  by  the  majority;  he  was  followed  by  Senator  Jones. 
Senator  Hill,  Senator  Vilas  and  ex-Governor  Russell  of  Massachusetts 
supported  the  substitute  offered  by  the  minority.  The  debate  was 
closed  by  myself.     The  speech  is  given  below: 

Speech  Concluding  Debate  on  the  Chicago  Platform* 

Mr.  Chairman  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  I  would  be  presumptu- 
ous, indeed,  to  present  myself  against  the  distinguished  gentlemen  to  whom 
you  have  listened  if  this  were  a  mere  measuring  of  abilities;  but  this  is  not  a  con- 
test between  persons.  The  humblest  citizen  in  all  the  land,  when  clad  in  the 
armor  of  a  righteous  cause,  is  stronger  than  all  the  hosts  of  error.  I  come  to 
speak  to  you  in  defense  of  a  cause  as  holy  as  the  cause  of  liberty — the  cause  of 
humanity. 

When  this  debate  is  concluded,  a  motion  will  be  made  to  lay  upon  the 
table  the  resolution  offered  in  commendation  of  the  administration,  and  also 
the  resolution  offered  in  condemnation  of  the  administration.  We  object  to 
bringing  this  question  down  to  the  level  of  persons.  The  individual  is  but  an 
atom;  he  is  born,  he  acts,  he  dies;  but  principles  are  eternal;  and  this  has  been 
a  contest  over  a  principle. 

Never  before  in  the  history  of  this  country  has  there  been  witnessed  such 
a  contest  as  that  through  which  we  have  just  passed.  Never  before  in  the 
history  of  American  politics  has  a  great  issue  been  fought  out  as  this  issue 
has  been,  by  the  voters  of  a  great  party.  On  the  fourth  of  March,  1895,  a  few 
Democrats,  most  of  them  members  of  Congress,  issued  an  address  to  the 
Democrats  of  the  nation,  asserting  that  the  money  question  was  the  paramount 
issue  of  the  hour;  declaring  that  a  majority  of  the  Democratic  party  had  the 
right  to  control  the  action  of  the  party  on  this  paramount  issue;  and  con- 
cluding with  the  request  that  the  believers  in  the  free  coinage  of  silver  in  the 
Democratic  party  should  organize,  take  charge  of,  and  control  the  policy  of 
the  Democratic  party.  Three  months  later,  at  Memphis,  an  organization  was 
perfected,  and  the  silver  Democrats  went  forth  openly  and  courageously  pro- 
claiming their  belief,  and  declaring  that,  if  successful,  they  would  crystallize  into 
a  platform  the  declaration  which  they  had  made.  Then  began  the  conflict. 
With  a  zeal  approaching  the  zeal  which  inspired  the  crusaders  who  followed 
Peter  the  Hermit,  our  silver  Democrats  went  forth  from  victory  unto  victory 
until  they  are  now  assembled,  not  to  discuss,  not  to  debate,  but  to  enter  up  the 
judgment  already  rendered  by  the  plain  people  of  this  country.  In  this  contest 
brother  has  been  arrayed  against  brother,  father  against  son.  The  warmest  ties 
of  love,  acquaintance  and  association  have  been  disregarded;  old  leaders  have 
been  cast  aside  when  they  have  refused  to  give  expression  to  the  sentiments  of 
those  whom  they  would  lead,  and  new  leaders  have  sprung  up  to  give  direction 


200  CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM. 

to  this  cause  of  truth.  Thus  has  the  contest  been  waged,  and  we  have  assem- 
bled here  under  as  binding  and  solemn  instructions  as  were  ever  imposed  upon 
representatives  of  the  people. 

We  do  not  come  as  individuals.  As  individuals  we  might  have  been  glad 
to  compliment  the  gentleman  from  New  York  (Senator  Hill),  but  we  know 
that  the  people  for  whom  we  speak  would  never  be  willing  to  put  him  in  a 
position  where  he  could  thwart  the  will  of  the  Democratic  party.  I  say  it  was 
not  a  question  of  persons;-  it  was  a  question  of  principle,  and  it  is  not  with 
gladness,  my  friends,  that  we  find  ourselves  brought  into  conflict  with  those 
who  are  now  arrayed  on  the  other  side. 

The  gentleman  who  preceded  me  (ex-Governor  Russell)  spoke  of  the  State 
of  Massachusetts;  let  me  assure  him  that  not  one  present  in  all  this  convention 
entertains  the  least  hostility  to  the  people  of  the  State  of  Massachusetts,  but 
we  stand  here  representing  people  who  are  the  equals,  before  the  law,  of  the 
greatest  citizens  in  the  State  of  Massachusetts.  When  you  (turning  to  the 
gold  delegates)  come  before  us  and  tell  us  that  we  are  about  to  disturb  your 
business  interests,  we  reply  that  you  have  disturbed  our  business  interests  by 
your  course. 

We  say  to  you  that  you  have  made  the  definition  of  a  business  man  too 
limited  in  its  application.  The  man  who  is  employed  for  wages  is  as  much  a 
business  man  as  his  employer;  the  attorney  in  a  country  town  is  as  much  a 
business  man  as  the  corporation  counsel  in  a  great  metropolis;  the  merchant 
at  the  cross-rcads  store  is  as  much  a  business  man  as  the  merchant  of  New 
York;  the  farmer  who  goes  forth  in  the  morning  and  toils  all  day — who  begins 
in  the  spring  and  toils  all  summer — and  who  by  the  application  of  brain  and 
muscle  to  the  natural  resources  of  the  country  creates  wealth,  is  as  much  a  busi- 
ness man  as  the  man  who  goes  upon  the  board  of  trade  and  bets  upon  the  price 
of  grain;  the  miners  who  go  down  a  thousand  feet  into  the  earth,  or  climb 
two  thousand  feet  upon  the  cliflfs,  and  bring  forth  from  their  hiding  places 
the  precious  metals  to  be  poured  into  the  channels  of  trade  are  as  much  busi- 
ness men  as  the  few  financial  magnates  who,  in  a  back  room,  corner  the  money 
of  the  world.     We  come  to  speak  for  this  broader  class  of  business  men. 

Ah,  my  friends,  we  say  not  one  word  against  those  who  live  upon  the 
Atlantic  coast,  but  the  hardy  pioneers  who  have  braved  all  the  dangers  of 
the  wilderness,  who  have  made  the  desert  to  blossom  as  the  rose — the  pioneers 
away  out  there  (pointing  to  the  West),  who  rear  their  children  near  to  Nature's 
heart,  where  they  can  mingle  their  voices  with  the  voices  of  the  birds — out  there 
where  they  have  erected  schoolhouses  for  the  education  of  their  young, 
churches  where  they  praise  their  Creator,  and  cemeteries  where  rest  the  ashes 
of  their  dead — these  people,  we  say,  are  as  deserving  of  the  consideration  of  our 
party  as  any  people  in  this  country.  It  is  for  these  that  we  speak.  We  do 
not  come  as  aggressors.  Our  war  is  not  a  war  of  conquest;  we  are  fighting 
in  the  defense  of  our  homes,  our  families,  and  posterity.  We  have  petitioned, 
and  our  petitions  have  been  scorned;  we  have  entreated,  and  our  entreaties 
have  been  disregarded;  we  have  begged,  and  they  have  mocked  when  our 
calamity  came.  We  beg  no  longer;  we  entreat  no  more;  we  petition  no  more. 
We  defy  them. 

The  gentleman  from  Wisconsin  has  said  that  he  fears  a  Robespierre.     My 


CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM.  203 

friends,  in  this  land  of  the  free  you  need  not  fear  that  a  tyrant  will  spring  up 
from  among  the  people.  What  we  need  is  an  Andrew  Jackson  to  stand,  as 
Jackson  stood,  against  the  encroachments  of  organized  wealth. 

They  tell  us  that  this  platform  was  made  to  catch  votes.  We  reply  to 
Ihem  that  changing  conditions  make  new  issues;  that  the  principles  upon  which 
Democracy  rests  are  as  everlasting  as  the  hills,  but  that  they  must  be  applied 
to  new  conditions  as  they  arise.  Conditions  have  arisen,  and  we  are  here  to 
meet  those  conditions.  They  tell  us  that  the  income  tax  ought  not  to  be 
brought  in  here;  that  it  is  a  new  idea.  They  criticise  us  for  our  criticism  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  My  friends,  we  have  not  criticised;  we 
have  simply  called  attention  to  what  you  already  know.  If  you  want  criticisms, 
read  the  dissenting  opinions  of  the  court.  There  you  will  find  criticisms.  They 
say  that  we  passed  an  unconstitutional  law;  we  deny  it.  The  income  tax  law 
was  not  unconstitutional  when  it  was  passed;  it  was  not  unconstitutional  when 
it  went  before  the  Supreme  Court  for  the  first  time;  it  did  not  become  uncon- 
stitutional until  one  of  the  judges  changed  his  mind,  and  we  cannot  be  ex- 
pected to  know  when  a  judge  will  change  his  mind.  The  income  tax  is  just. 
It  simply  intends  to  put  the  burdens  of  government  justly  upon  the  backs  of 
the  people.  I  am  in  favor  of  an  income  tax.  When  I  find  a  man  who  is  not 
willing  to  bear  his  share  of  the  burdens  of  the  government  which  protects  him, 
I  find  a  man  who  is  unworthy  to  enjoy  the  blessings  of  a  government  like  ours. 
They  say  that  we  are  opposing  national  bank  currency;  it  is  true. 
If  you  will  read  what  Thomas  Benton  said,  you  will  find  he  said  that,  in 
searching  history,  he  could  find  but  one  parallel  to  Andrew  Jackson;  that  was 
Cicero,  who  destroyed  the  conspiracy  of  Cataline  and  saved  Rome.  Benton 
said  that  Cicero  only  did  for  Rome  what  Jackson  did  for  us  when  he  destroyed 
the  bank  conspiracy  and  saved  America.  We  say  in  our  platform  that  we  believe 
that  the  right  to  coin  and  issue  money  is  a  function  of  government.  We  believe 
it.  We  believe  that  it  is  a  part  of  sovereignty,  and  can  no  more  with  safety  be  dele- 
gated to  private  individuals  than  we  could  afford  to  delegate  to  private  individuals 
the  power  to  make  penal  statutes  or  levy  taxes.  Mr.  Jefferson,  who  was  once  re- 
garded as  good  Democratic  authority,  seems  to  have  differed  in  opinion  from 
the  gentleman  who  has  addressed  us  on  the  part  of  the  minority.  Those  who 
are  opposed  to  this  proposition  tell  us  that  the  issue  of  paper  money  is  a  function 
of  the  bank,  and  that  the  Government  ought  to  go  out  of  the  banking  business. 
I  stand  with  Jefferson  rather  than  with  them,  and  tell  them,  as  he  did,  that 
the  issue  of  money  is  a  function  of  government,  and  that  the  banks  ought  to  go 
out  of  the  governing  business. 

They  complain  about  the  plank  which  declares  against  life  tenure  in 
office.  They  have  tried  to  strain  it  to  mean  that  which  it  does  not  mean. 
What  we  oppose  by  that  plank  is  the  life  tenure  which  is  being  built  up  in 
Washington,  and  which  excludes  from  participation  in  official  benefits  the 
humbler  members   of   society. 

Let  me  call  your  attention  to  two  or  three  important  things.  The  gentle- 
man from  New  York  says  that  he  will  propose  an  amendment  to  the  plat- 
form providing  that  the  proposed  change  in  our  monetary  system  shall  not 
affect  contracts  already  made.  Let  me  remind  you  that  there  is  no  intention 
of  affecting  those  contracts  which  according  to  present  laws  are  made  payable 


204  CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM. 

in  gold;  but  if  he  means  to  say  that  we  cannot  change  our  monetary  system 
without  protecting  those  who  have  loaned  money  before  the  change  was  made, 
I  desire  to  ask  him  where,  in  law  or  in  morals,  he  can  find  justification  for  not 
protecting  the  debtors  when  the  act  of  1873  was  passed,  if  he  now  insists  that 
we  must  protect  the  creditors. 

He  says  he  will  also  propose  an  amendment  which  will  provide  for  the  sus- 
pension of  free  coinage  if  we  fail  to  maintain  the  parity  within  a  year.  We 
reply  that  when  we  advocate  a  policy  which  we  believe  will  be  successful,  we 
are  not  compelled  to  raise  a  doubt  as  to  our  own  sincerity  by  suggesting  what 
we  shall  do  if  we  fail.  I  ask  him,  if  he  would  apply  his  logic  to  us,  why  he  does 
not  apply  it  to  himself.  He  says  he  wants  this  country  to  try  to  secure  an  in- 
ternational agreement.  Why  does  he  not  tell  us  what  he  is  going  to  do  if 
he  fails  to  secure  an  international  agreement?  There  is  more  reason  for  him 
to  do  that  than  there  is  for  us  to  provide  against  the  failure  to  maintain  the 
parity.  Our  opponents  have  tried  for  twenty  years  to  secure  an  international 
agreement,  and  those  are  waiting  for  it  most  patiently  who  do  not  want  it 
at  all. 

And  now,  my  friends,  let  me  come  to  the  paramount  issue.  If  they  ask 
us  why  it  is  that  we  say  more  on  the  money  question  than  we  say  upon 
the  tariff  question,  I  reply  that,  if  protection  has  slain  its  thousands, 
the  gold  standard  has  slain  its  tens  of  thousands.  If  they  ask  us  why  we  do 
not  embody  in  our  platform  all  the  things  that  we  believe  in,  we  reply  that 
when  we  have  restored  the  money  of  the  Constitution  all  other  necessary 
reforms  will  be  possible;  but  that  until  this  is  done  there  is  no  other  reform 
that  can  be  accomplished. 

Why  is  it  that  within  three  months  such  a  change  has  come  over  the 
country?  Three  months  ago,  when  it  was  confidently  asserted  that  those  who 
believe  in  the  gold  standard  would  frame  our  platform  and  nominate  our  can- 
didates, even  the  advocates  of  the  gold  standard  did  not  think  that  we  could 
elect  a  president.  And  they  had  good  reason  for  their  doubt,  because  there 
is  scarcely  a  State  here  today  asking  for  the  gold  standard  which  is  not  in  the 
absolute  control  of  the  Republican  party.  But  note  the  change.  Mr.  McKinley 
was  nominated  at  St.  Louis  upon  a  platform  which  declared  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  gold  standard'  until  it  can  be  changed  into  bimetallism  by  inter- 
national agreement.  Mr.  McKinley  was  the  most  popular  man  among  the 
Republicans,  and  three  months  ago  everybody  in  the  Republican  party  prophe- 
sied his  election.  How  is  today?  Why,  the  man  who  was  once  pleased  to  think 
that  he  looked  like  Napoleon — that  man  shudders  today  when  he  remembers 
that  he  was  nominated  on  the  anniversary  of  the  battle  of  Waterloo.  Not  only 
that,  but  as  he  listens  he  can  hear  with  ever-increasing  distinctness  the  sound 
of  the  waves  as  they  beat  upon  the  lonely  shores  of  St.  Helena. 

Why  this  change?  Ah,  my  friends,  is  not  the  reason  for  the  change  evident 
to  any  one  who  will  look  at  the  matter?  No  private  character,  however  pure, 
no  personal  popularity,  however  great,  can  protect  from  the  avenging  wrath 
of  an  indignant  people  a  man  who  will  declare  that  he  is  in  favor  of  fastening 
the  gold  standard  upon  this  country,  or  who  is  willing  to  surrender  the  right 
of  self-government  and  place  the  legislative  control  of  our  affairs  in  the  hands  of 
foreign  potentates  and  powers. 


CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM.  205 

We  go  forth  confident  that  we  shall  win.  Why?  Because  upon  the  par- 
amount issue  of  this  campaign  there  is  not  a  spot  of  ground  upon  which  the 
enemy  will  dare  to  challenge  battle.  If  they  tell  us  that  the  gold  standard  is 
a  good  thing,  we  shall  point  to  their  platform  and  tell  them  that  their  platform 
pledges  the  party  to  get  rid  of  the  gold  standard  and  substitute  bimetallism.  If 
the  gold  standard  is  a  good  thing,  why  try  to  get  rid  of  it?  I  call  your  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  some  of  the  very  people  who  are  in  this  convention  today 
and  who  tell  us  that  we  ought  to  declare  in  favor  of  international  bimetallism — 
thereby  declaring  that  the  gold  standard  is  wrong  and  that  the  principle  of 
bimetallism  is  better — these  very  people  four  months  ago  were  open  and  avowed 
advocates  of  the  gold  standard,  and  were  then  telling  us  that  we  could  not 
legislate  two  metals  together,  even  with  the  aid  of  all  the  world.  If  the  gold 
standard  is  a  good  thing,  we  ought  to  declare  in  favor  of  its  retention  and 
not  in  favor  of  abandoning  it;  and  if  the  gold  standard  is  a  bad  thing  why  should 
we  wait  until  other  nations  are  willing  to  help  us  to  let  go?  Here  is  the 
line  of  battle,  and  we  care  not  upon  which  issue  they  force  the  fight;  we  are 
prepared  to  meet  them  on  either  issue  or  on  both.  If  they  tell  us  that  the 
gold  standard  is  the  standard  of  civilization,  we  reply  to  them  that  this,  the  most 
enlightened  of  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  has  never  declared  for  a  gold  standard 
and  that  both  the  great  parties  this  year  are  declaring  against  it.  If  the  gold 
standard  is  the  standard  of  civilization,  why,  my  friends,  should  we  not  have 
it?  If  they  come  to  meet  us  on  that  issue  we  can  present  the  history  of  our 
nation.  More  than  that;  we  can  tell  them  that  they  will  search  the  pages  of 
history  in  vain  to  find  a  single  instance  where  the  common  people  of  any  land 
have  ever  declared  themselves  in  favor  of  the  gold  standard.  They  can  find 
where  the  holders  of  fixed  investments  have  declared  for  a  gold  standard,  but 
not  where  the  masses  have. 

Mr.  Carlisle  said  in  1878  that  this  was  a  struggle  between  "the  idle  holders 
of  idle  capital"  and  "the  struggling  masses,  who  produce  the  wealth  and  pay 
the  taxes  of  the  country;"  and,  my  friends,  the  question  we  are  to  decide  is: 
Upon  which  side  will  the  Democratic  party  fight;  upon  the  side  of  "the  idle 
holders  of  idle  capital"  or  upon  the  side  of  "the  struggling  masses?"  That  is 
the  question  which  the  party  must  answer  first,  and  then  it  must  be  answered 
by  each  individual  hereafter.  The  sympathies  of  the  Democratic  party,  as  shown 
by  the  platform,  are  on  the  side  of  the  struggling  masses  who  have  ever  been 
the  foundation  of  the  Democratic  party.  There  are  two  ideas  of  government. 
There  are  those  who  believe  that,  if  you  will  only  legislate  to  make  the  well-to-do 
prosperous,  their  prosperity  will  leak  through  on  those  below.  The  Democratic 
idea,  however,  has  been  that  if  you  legislate  to  make  the  masses  prosperous, 
their  prosperity  will  find  its  way  up  through  every  class  which  rests  upon 
them. 

You  come  to  us  and  tell  us  that  the  great  cities  are  in  favor  of  the  gold 
standard;  we  reply  that  the  great  cities  rest  upon  our  broad  and  fertile  prairies. 
Burn  down  your  cities  and  leave  our  farms,  and  your  cities  will  spring  up  again 
as  if  by  magic;  but  destroy  our  farms  and  the  grass  will  grow  in  the  streets 
of  every  city  in  the  country. 

My  friends,  we  declare  that  this  nation  is  able  to  legislate  for  its  own 
people  on  every  question,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other 


206  CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM. 

nation  on  earth;  and  upon  that  issue  we  expect  to  carry  every  State  in  the  Union. 
I  shall  not  slander  the  inhabitants  of  the  fair  State  of  Massachusetts 
nor  the  inhabitants  of  the  State  of  New  York  by  saying  that,  when 
they  are  confronted  with  the  proposition,  they  will  declare  that  this  nation 
is  not  able  to  attend  to  its  own  business.  It  is  the  issue  of  1776  over  again. 
Our  ancestors,  when  but  three  millions  in  number,  had  the  courage  to  declare 
their  political  independence  of  every  other  nation;  shall  we,  their  descendants, 
when  we  have  grown  to  seventy  millions,  declare  that  we  are  less  independent 
than  our  forefathers?  No,  my  friends,  that  will  never  be  the  verdict  of  our 
people.  Therefore,  we  care  not  upon  what  lines  the  battle  is  fought.  If  they 
say  bimetallism  is  good,  but  that  we  cannot  have  it  until  other  nations  help  us, 
we  reply  that,  instead  of  having  a  gold  standard  because  England  has,  we  will 
restore  bimetallism,  and  then  let  England  have  bimetallism  because  the  United 
States  has  it.  If  they  dare  to  come  out  in  the  open  field  and  defend  the  gold 
standard  as  a  good  thing,  we  will  fight  them  to  the  uttermost.  Having  behind 
us  the  producing  masses  of  this  nation  and  the  world,  supported  by  the 
commercial  interests,  the  laboring  interests,  and  the  toilers  everywhere,  we  will 
answer  their  demand  for  a  gold  standard  by  saying  to  them:  You  shall  not 
press  down  upon  the  brow  of  labor  this  crown  of  thorns,  you  shall  not  crucify 
mankind  upon  a  cross  of  gold. 

In  view  of  the  wide  publication  of  this  speech,  I  may  be  pardoned 
for  making  some  reference  to  it.  While  a  member  of  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions,  I  was  prevented  from  attending  the  first  sessions  of  the 
committee  owing  to  our  contest,  and  was  not  a  member  of  the  sub- 
committee which  drafted  the  platform.  As  soon  as  our  contest  was 
settled,  I  met  with  the  committee  and  took  part  in  the  final  discus- 
sion and  adoption  of  the  platform.  Just  before  the  platform  was  re- 
ported to  the  convention,  Senator  Jones  sent  for  me  and  asked  me  to 
take  charge  of  the  debate.  In  dividing  the  time  I  was  to  have  twenty 
minutes  to  close,  but  as  the  minority  used  ten  minutes  more  than 
the  time  originally  allotted,  my  time  was  extended  ten  minutes.  The 
concluding  sentence  of  my  speech  was  criticised  both  favorably  and 
unfavorably.  I  had  used  the  idea  in  substantially  the  same  form  in 
a  speech  in  Congress,  but  did  not  recall  the  fact  when  I  used  it  in 
the  convention.  A  portion  of  the  speech  was  extemporaneous,  and 
its  arrangement  entirely  so,  but  parts  of  it  had  been  prepared  for 
another  occasion.  Next  to  the  conclusion,  the  part  most  quoted  was 
the  definition  of  the  term,  "business  men."  Since  I  became  inter- 
ested in  the  discussion  of  monetary  questions,  I  have  often  had  oc- 
casion to  note  and  comment  upon  the  narrowness  of  some  of  the 
terms  used,  and  nowhere  is  this  narrowness  more  noticeable  than 
in  the  attempt  to  ignore  the  most  important  business  men  of  the 
country,  the  real  creators  of  wealth. 


CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM. 


207 


On  the  motion  to  adopt  the  suhstitute  offered  by  the  minority, 
the  vote  by  States  was  as  follows : 


States.  Total  Vote. 

Alabama 22 

Arkansas 16 

California 18 

Colorado 8 

Connecticut 12 

Delaware 6 

Florida 8 

Georgia 26 

Idaho 6 

Illinois 48 

Indiana 80 

Iowa 26 

Kansas 20 

Kentucky 26 

Louisiana 16 

Maine 12 

Maryland 16 

Massachusetts 30 

Michigan 28 

Minnesota* 18 

Mississippi 18 

Missouri 34 

Montana 6 

Nebraska 16 

Nevada :..     6 

New  Hampshire.  .     8 
New  Jersey 20 


Ayes. 

Nays. 

States,                 Total  Vote. 

Ayes. 

Nays. 

6 

16 

New  York 

.  72 

72 

16 

North  Carolina. . . 

.  22 

22 

18 

North  Dakota 

.    6 

6 

8 

Ohio 

46 

46 

12 

Oregon 

.     8 

8 

5 

1 

Pennsylvania  

.  64 

64 

3 

5 

Rhode  Island 

.    8 

8 

26 

South  Carolina. . . 

18 

18 

6 

South  Dakota 

8 

8 

48 

Tennessee 

24 

24 

30 

Texas 

.  30 

80 

26 

Utah 

.    6 

6 

20 

Vermont 

8 

8 

. . 

26 

Virginia 

.  24 

24 

16 

Washington 

8 

3 

5 

10 

2 

West  Virginia 

12 

12 

12 

4 

Wisconsin 

24 

24 

27 

3 

28 

Wyoming 

Territories. 

6 

6 

11 

6 

18 

Alaska 

6 

6 

Arizona 

6 

6 

34 

Dist.  of  Columbia. 

6 

2 

4 

6 

New  Mexico 

6 

2 

4 

16 

Oklahoma 

6 

6 

6 

Indian  Territory. 

6 

6 

20 


Totals. 


.930 


303 


626 


*One  absent  from  Minnesota. 

After  the  defeat  of  the  substitute,  the  roll  was  called  upon  the 
following  amendment  offered  by  Senator  Hill: 

We  commend  the  honesty,  economy,  courage  and  fidelity  of  the  present 
Democratic  National  Administration. 


Upon  this, 

the  vote 

by  States 

was  as  follows: 

Total 

Not 

Total 

Not, 

states. 

Vote. 

Ayes 

Nays. 

Vot'g 

States. 

Vote. 

Ayee. 

Nays. 

VotV 

Alabama 

..22 

22 

Indiana 

..30 

30 

Arkansas 

..16 

16 

Iowa 

...26 

26 

California 

..18 

11 

3 

4 

Kansas 

..20 

20 

Colorado 

..  8 

8 

Kentucky 

..26 

26 

Connecticut 

..12 

12 

Louisiana 

..16 

16 

Delaware 

..  6 

5 

1 

Maine 

..12 

11 

1 

Florida 

..  8 

7 

1 

Maryland 

..16 

16 

,  , 

Georgia 

..26 

26 

Massachusetts. 

..30 

28 

1 

1 

Idaho 

..  6 

6 

Michigan 

..28 

28 

Illinois 

..48 

,  , 

48 

Minnesota 

..18 

17 

1 

208 


CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM. 


Total 

States.                     Vote.  Ayes.    Nays, 

Mississippi 18  ..         18 

Missouri 34  ..        34 

Montana 6  . .          4 

Nebraska 16  .,        16 

Nevada 6  ..          6 

New  Hampshire  .8  8 

New  Jersey 20  20 

New  York 72  72 

North  Carolina. .  .22  . .        22 

North  Dakota 6  5 

Ohio 46  ..        46 

Oregon 8  ..          8 

Pennsylvania 64  64 

Rhode  Island 8  8 

South  Carolina. .  .18  ..         18 

South  Dakota. ...  8  8 

Tennessee 24  . .        24 


Not 
Vofg 


Total 

Statee.  Vote. 

Texas 30 

Utah 6 

Vermont 8 

Virginia 24 

Washington 8 

West  Virginia  . .  .12 

Wisconsin 24 

Wyoming 6 

Territories. 

Alaska 6 

Arizona 6 

Dist.  of  Columbia.  6 

New  Mexico 6 

Oklahoma 6 

Indian  Territory..  6 


Ayes. 


24 


Not 
Nays.  Vot'g 

30 

6 

24 

5 

11 


Totals 930      357      664 


Mr.  Hill  then  offered  the  following  amendments: 

But  it  should  be  carefully  provided  by  law  at  the  same  time  that  any  change 
in  the  monetary  standard  should  not  apply  to  existing  contracts. 

Our  advocacy  of  the  independent  free  coinage  of  silver  being  based  on  belief 
that  such  coinage  will  effect  and  maintain  a  parity  between  gold  and  silver 
at  the  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  we  declare  as  a  pledge  of  our  sincerity  that,  if  such  free 
coinage  shall  fail  to  effect  such  parity  within  one  year  from  its  enactment  by 
law,  such  coinage  shall  thereupon  be  suspended. 

Both  amendments  were  defeated  without  roll   call.     Upon 
motion  to  adopt  the  platform,  the  vote  by  states  was  as  follows: 

states.  Total  Vote. 

Michigan 28 

Minnesota* 18 

Mississippi 18 

Missouri 34 


the 


Ayes.  Nays 
22 
16 
18 


States.  Total  Vote, 

Alabama 22 

Arkansas 16 

California 18 

Colorado 8  '  8 

Connecticut 12  ..         12 

Delaware 6  1          5 

Florida 8  5         3 

Georgia 26  26 

Idaho 6  6 

Illinois 48  48 

Indiana 30  30 

Iowa 26  26 

Kansas 20  20 

Kentucky 26  26 

Louisiana 16  16 

Maine 12  2        10 

Maryland 16  4        12 

Massachusetts 30  3        27 


Montana 6 

Nebraska 16 

Nevada 6 

New  Hampshire 8 

New  Jersey 20 

New  York 72 

North  Carolina 22 

North  Dakota 6 

Ohio 46 

Oregon 8 

Pennsylvania 64 

Rhode  Island 8 

South  Carolina 18 


Ayes. 

Nays. 

28 

6 

11 

18 

34 

,  , 

6 

16 

6 

8 

20 

,  , 

72 

22 

6 

46 

8 

64 

8 

18 


*One  not  voting 


CONTEST  OVER  THE  PLATFORM. 


20$ 


States.                       Total  Vote.  Ayes.  Naysl 

South  Dakota 8  . .          8 

Tennessee 24  24 

Texas 30  30 

Utah 6  6 

Vermont 8  ..          8 

Virginia 24  24 

Washington 8  5          3 

West  Virginia 12  12 

Wisconsin 24  ,.        24 

Wyoming 6  ..          6 


Territories. 


Total  Vote.  Ayes.  Nays. 

Alaska 6  . .          6 

Arizona 6  6 

Dist.  of  Columbia 6  6 

New  Mexico 6  6 

Oklahoma 6  6 

Indian  Territory 6  6 

Totals 930  628      301 


CHAPTER  XL 


THE  PRESIDENTIAL  NOMINATION. 

THE  several  candidates  were  placed  in  nomination  by  their  re- 
spective States  and  the  speeches  were  of  a  high  order.  The 
name  of  Hon.  Richard  Parks  Bland,  of  Missouri,  was  pre- 
sented by  Senator  Vest,  of  that  State,  and  the  nomination  was  seconded 
by  Hon.  David  Overmyer,  of  Kansas,  Hon.  J.  R.  Williams,  of  Illinois, 
Hon.  Paul  Jones,  of  Arkansas,  Hon.  J.  W.  Bailey,  of  Texas,  and  Hon. 
J.  L.  Rawlins,  of  Utah. 

Senator  Turpie,  of  Indiana,  placed  before  the  convention  the  name 
of  Governor  Claude  Matthews,  of  that  State,  and  his  nomination  was 
seconded  by  Hon.  Oscar  Tripet,  of  California. 

Ex-Congressman  Fred  White,  of  Iowa,  presented  the  claims  of 
ex-Governor  Horace  Boies,  of  that  State,  and  the  nomination  was 
seconded  by  Hon.  T.  A.  Smith,  of  Minnesota. 

The  name  of  Senator  J.  C.  S.  Blackburn,  of  Kentucky,  was  pre- 
sented by  Hon.  John  S.  Rhea,  of  that  State,  and  speeches  were  made 
by  Hon.  W.  W,  Foote,  of  California,  Hon.  James  Malone,  of  Wiscon- 
sin, and  Hon.  J,  W.  St.  Clair,  of  Virginia,  in  support  of  the  nomination. 

Col.  A.  W.  Patrick,  of  Ohio,  presented  the  name  of  Hon.  John  R. 
McLean,  of  that  State,  and  the  nomination  was  seconded  by  Hon. 
Robert  E.  Mattingly,  of  the  District  of  Columbia. 

Hon.  W.  W.  Foote  of  California  stated  that  California  desired 
to  nominate  Senator  Stephen  H.  White  of  that  State,  but  that  Mr. 
White  declined  to  allow  his  name  to  be  presented. 

Hon.  W.  A.  Jones  of  Virginia  announced  that  the  Democrats  of 
his  State  in  convention  assembled  had  requested  the  delegation  to  pre- 
sent the  name  of  Hon.  John  W^  Daniel,  but  that  in  compliance  with 
his  request,  the  delegation  refrained  from  doing  so. 

Hon.  John  W.  Corcoran,  of  Massacliusetts,  stated  that  the  Demo- 
crats of  his  State  had,  by  unanimous  vote,  instructed  the  delegation 
to  support  ex-Governor  William  E.  Russell,  but  that  because  of  the 
platform  adopted,  he  had  asked  that  his  name  be  not  presented.  Hon. 
William  F.  Harrity,  of  Pennsylvania,  stated  that  in  obedience  to  the 
instructions  of  the  Democratic  Convention  of  that  State,  the  Pennsyl- 
vania delegation  presented  the  name  of  Hon.   Robert  E,   Pattison. 

210 


THE  PRESIDENTIAL  NOMINATION.  213 

Hon.  M.  A.  Miller,  of  Oregon,  on  behalf  of  his  delegation,  presented 
the  name  of  Hon.  Sylvester  Pennoyer  of  that  State. 

I  left  the  convention  hall  at  the  close  of  the  afternoon  session  and 
did  not  return.  It  was  arranged  that  the  delegation  from  Nebraska 
should  make  no  formal  nomination.  I  remained  in  my  room  at  the 
hotel  and  there  received  the  bulletins  from  the  convention  hall.  Know- 
ing the  intentions  of  the  Nebraska  delegation,  and  not  knowing  that 
any  speeches  were  to  be  made  by  others,  I  was  surprised  when  the  bul- 
letins announced  that  Hon.  Henry  T.  Lewis  of  Georgia,  had  been 
recognized  to  present  my  name.    He  said : 

Mr.  Lewis'  Speecli* 

Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  I  do  not  intend  to  make 
a  speech,  but  simply,  in  behalf  of  the  delegation  on  this  floor  from  the  State  of 
Georgia,  to  place  in  nomination  as  the  Democratic  candidate  for  the  Presidency 
of  the  United  States  a  distinguished  citizen,  whose  very  name  is  an  earnest  of 
success,  whose  political  record  will  insure  Democratic  victory,  and  whose  life 
and  character  are  loved  and  honored  by  the  American  people. 

Should  public  office  be  bestowed  as  a  reward  for  public  service?  Then  no 
man  more  than  he  merits  this  reward.  Is  public  office  a  public  trust?  Then 
in  no  other  hands  can  be  more  safely  lodged  this  greatest  trust  in  the  gift  of  a 
great  people.  Was  pubjic  office  created  for  the  welfare  of  the  people  and  the 
prosperity  of  the  country?  Then  under  his  leadership  in  the  coming  campaign 
may  we  confidently  hope  to  achieve  these  great  ends  in  human  government. 
In  the  political  storms  that  have  hitherto  swept  over  this  country  he  has  stood 
on  the  field  of  battle  among  the  leaders  of  the  Democratic  hosts  like  Saul 
among  the  Israelites,  head  and  shoulders  above  all  the  rest.  As  Mr.  Prentiss 
said  of  the  immortal  Clay,  so  we  can  truthfully  say  of  him,  that  "His  civic 
laurels  will  not  yield  in  splendor  to  the  brightest  chaplet  that  ever  bloomed 
upon  a  warrior's  brow." 

He  needs  no  speech  to  introduce  him  to  this  convention.  He  needs  no 
encomium  to  commend  him  to  the  people  of  the  United  States.  Honor  him, 
fellow  Democrats,  and  you  will  honor  yourselves.  Nominate  him  and  you 
will  reflect  credit  upon  the  party  you  represent.  Place  in  his  hands  the  Demo- 
cratic standard  and  you  will  have  a  leader  worthy  of  your  cause,  and  will  win 
for  yourselves  the  plaudits  of  your  constituents  and  the  blessings  of  posterity. 
I  refer,  fellow  citizens,  to  the  Honorable  William  J.  Bryan,  of  the  State  of 
Nebraska. 

The  nomination  was  seconded  by  Hon.  Theo.  F.  Kluttz  or  North 
Carolina,  Hon.  George  Fred  Williams  of  Massachusetts,  Hon.  Thomas 
J.  Kernan  of  Louisiana,  and  Hon.  E.  J.  Dockery  of  Wisconsin. 

When  Nebraska  was  called,  Hon.  C.  J.  Smyth,  chairman  of  the 
delegation,  announced  that  the  State  passed  for  the  present,  but  that  at 
the  proper  time  the  vote  would  be  cast  for  me. 

The  nomination  was  made  upon  the  fifth  ballot  on  Friday,  the  loth. 
The  vote  of  the  States  upon  the  several  ballots  was  as  follows: 

12 


214 


THE  PRESIDENTIAL  NOMINATION. 


FIRST   BALLOT. 


STATES. 

h3 

< 

s 

S5 

< 

P3 

pq 

3 

33 

H 
H 

< 

< 
0 

H 

•< 

'3 
1 

11 

3 
'2 

64 
6 

i 

97 

» 
p 

n 
M 
0 

< 

"9 

i 

26 

"i 

'2 

24 

i2 
1 
6 

82 

i 

►     1- 

H 
00 
P 

1 

H 

n 

a 

0 

0 
S5 

M 

w 

0  > 

Alabama 

22 
16 

18 

8 

12 

6 

8 

26 

6 

48 

30 

26 

20 

26 

16 

12 

16 

30 

28 

18 

18 

34 

6 

16 

6 

8 

20 

72 

22 

6 

46 

8 

64 

8 

18 

8 

24 

30 

6 

8 

24 

8 

12 

24 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

930 

"4 

.'i 

1 

26 

ie 

2 
4 

1 

9 
2 

18 

ie 

22 

"6 
4 

'i 

"4 

137 

ie 

'2 

'6 

48 

20 

"2 

'2 
4 

34 
4 

24 

30 

6 

'7 

6 
6 

'e 

6 
6 

235 

22 
'2 

i 

26 

'6 
4 

6 

"i 

67 

2 
'2 
30 

'3 
37 

■3 

46 

"b 
54 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

6 

8.. 
.    2 

1 

Connecticut 

10 

Delaware  

2 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas • 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

3 

1 

Massachusetts 

18 

3   2 

i? 

17 

1 

*8 
8 

10 

Minnesota 

8 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Nebraska 

Nevada  

New  Hampshire 

7 

20 

New  York 

72 

North   Dakota 

Oregon 

Rhode  Island 

2 

1 

South  Dakota 

1 

Texas 

Utah 

Vermont 

4 

Washington 

Wisconsin 

19 

Alaska 

District  of  Columbia 

Indian  Territory 

New  Mexico 

Totals 

178 

THE  PRESIDENTIAL  NOMINATION. 


215 


SECOND   BALLOT. 


STATES. 

>4 

•<  ' 

22 

16 

18 

8 

12 

6 

8 

26 

6 

48 

30 

26 

20 

26 

16 

12 

16 

30 

28 

18 

18 

34 

6 

16 

6 

8 

20 

72 

22 

6 

46 

8 

64 

8 

18 

8 

24 

30 

6 

8 

24 

8 

12 

24 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

930 

> 

n 

U 

"\ 

2 

26 

ie 

2 
4 

1 

28 
4 

18 

i6 

22 

is 

7 

'4 
"i 

*4 
6 

3 
197 

< 

cq 

22 

16 

2 

"i 

6 

48 

20 

'2 
'2 

34 
6 

24 

30 

6 

24 

7 

6 
6 
1 
6 
6 
6 

281 

H 

5 
n 

26 
'2 

'6 

i 

37 

t 

K 
h 

< 

'2 

30 
34 

< 

H 

s 

6 
46 

i 

63 

i 

00 
M 

H 

< 

'2 
3 
1 

'5 

11 

3 

"i 

*i 

2 

64 
6 

i 

100 

g 

M 
0 
■< 

m 

26 
2 

12 

1 

41 

i 
0 

CD 

»► 

i 

"5 
'4 

10 

M 

H 

,3 

8 
8 

M 
H 

2 

Z 
H 

Pm 

8 
8 

■i 

w 
i 

1 

i 

z 

Alabama 

Arkansas  

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

10 

Delaware 

? 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

8 

Maryland 

1 

Massachusetts 

17 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

5 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New  Hampshire 

7 

New  Jersey 

18 

New   York 

North  Carolina 

72 

North  Dakota 

Oresron ; 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode  Island 

?, 

South  Carolina 

South  Dakota 

Tennessee 

Texas  

Utah 

Vermont 

4 

Virginia 

Washington 

West  \  irginia 

Wisconsin 

19 

Wyoming 

Alaska 

Arizona 

District  of  Columbia 

New  Mexico 

Oklahoma 

Indian  Territory 

Totals 

160 

216 


THB  PRESIDENTIAL   NOMINATION. 


THIRD   BALLOT. 


STATES. 

< 

■< 

0 

< 

IB 

s 

03 

u 

< 

2: 

■< 

H 

0 

H 

■< 

M 

U 

n 

M 

pa 

i 

so 
CO 

M 

Alabama 

22 

16 

18 

8 

12 

6 

8 

26 

6 

48 

30 

26 

20 

26 

16 

12 

16 

30 

28 

18 

18 

34 

6 

16 

6 

8 

20 

72 

22 

6 

46 

8 

64 

8 

18 

8 

24 

30 

6 

8 

24 

8 

12 

24 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

930 

"is 

8 

22 

16 

2 

Arkansas  

California 

1 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

2 
3 

in 

Delaware 

1 

5 
26 

V{ 

Florida 

8 

Georgia 

Idaho  

6 

48 

Illinois 

Indiana 

30 

Iowa 

26 

Kansas 

•  •  •  • 

20 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

16 
2 
6 
1 

28 
9 

18 

■*i6 

2 

5 

10 

3 

8 

Maryland 

1 

Massachusetts 

2 

18 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

1 

6 

Mississippi 

34 
6 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

6 

New  Hampshire 

1 
2 

7 

New  Jersey 

.... 

18 

7? 

North  Carolina 

22 

North  Dakota 

6 

Ohio 

46 

1 

6 

2 

Pennsylvania 

64 
6 

9 

South  Carolina 

18 

7 

•■'4 
.... 

1 
3 
6 

■   '4 

219 

1 

Tennessee 

24 

30 

6 

Texas 

Utah 

4 

Virginia 

24 

7 
7 
2 

Washington 

West  Virginia 

2 

Wisconsin 

19 

Wyoming 

Alaska  

6 
6 

*"*6 
6 
6 

291 

Arizona 

District  of  Columbia 

. . . . 

New  Mexico 

Oklahoma 

Indian  Territory 

Totals 

36 

34 

54 

97 

27 

9 

1 

16? 

THE  PRESIDENTIAL  NOMINATION. 


217 


FOURTH   BALLOT. 


STATES. 

< 

1 

22 

16 

18 

8 

12 

6 

8 

26 

6 

48 

30 

26 

20 

26 

16 

12 

16 

30 

28 

18 

18 

34 

6 

16 

6 

8 

20 

72 

22 

6 

46 

8 

64 

8 

18 

8 

24 

30 

6 

8 

24 

8 

12 

24 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

930 

o 
< 

CD 

H 
S 

S5 

< 
X 

M 

oq 
22 

H 

K 

•< 

u 

n 

M 
O 

< 
PQ 

§■ 

H 

•< 

•< 

N 
O 

a 

S5 

o 
z 

> 
H 

M 

a 

Is 

Alabama 

Arkansas 

16 
2 

.... 

California 

12 
8 

1 

Colorado 

.... 

Connecticut 

2 
3 

10 

Delaware 

1 

5 

26 

6 

2 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho 

Illinois 

48 

Indiana 

30 

Iowa 

26 

. . . . 

Kansas 

20 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

16 
2 
6 

1 
28 
10 
18 

Maine 

2 

5 

10 

3 

3 

Maryland 

1 

Massachusetts 

2 

18 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

1 

5 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

34 
6 

Montana 

Nebraska 

16 
6 

Nevada 

New  Hampshite 

1 
2 

7 

New  Jersey 

18 

72 

North  Carolina 

22 

6 

Ohio 

Pennsylvania 

8 

64 
6 

2 

South  Carolina 

18 

7 

1 

Tennessee 

24 

30 

6 

Utah 

4 

4 

Virginia 

Washington 

24 

6 

10 

2 
1 
5 
6 

West  Virginia 

Wis'consin 

19 

Wyoming 

Alaska 

6 
6 

Arizona 

District  of  Columbia 

5 

1 

New  Mexico 

6 
6 
6 

241 

Oklahoma ... 

Indian  Territory 

Totals 

33 

280 

36 

27 

97 

46 

8 

1 

161 

218 


THE  PRESIDENTIAL  NOMINA  TION. 


FIFTH   BALLOT. 


STATES. 

o 

H 

S5 

P3 

S5 

o 

M 

H 

M 

»5 

Alabama                 

22 

16 

18 

8 

12 

6 

8 

26 

6 

48 

30 

26 

20 

26 

16 

12 

16 

30 

28 

18 

18 

34 

6 

16 

6 

8 

20 

72 

22 

6 

46 

8 

64 

8 

18 

8 

24 

30 

6 

8 

24 

8 

12 

24 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

930 

22 
16 

18 

8 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

,     2 

3 

Connecticut 

10 

Delaware 

1 

8 
26 

6 

48 
30 
26 
20 
26 
16 

4 

5 

6 
28 
11 
18 
34 

6 
16 

6 

« 

Florida 

Georgia    

Idaho      

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa      .       

Kansas     

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

4 

10 
3 

4 

1 

2 

ia 

Michigan 

2 

5 

Mississippi 

- 

Montana 

Nevada  

1 

2 

7 

New  Jersey 

18 

72 

North  Carolina 

22 
4 

46 
8 

2 

Ohio    

Pennsylvania 

64 
6 

2 

South  Carolina ■ 

18 
8 

24 

30 
6 
4 

24 
4 
2 
5 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 

652 

Tennessee 

Utah 

4 

Virginia 

4 

7 

West  Virginia 

2 

19 

Wyoming 

Arizona 

New  Mexico 

Indian  Territory 

Totals 

11 

95 

8 

1 

1 

162 

THE  PRESIDENTIAL  NOMINATION.  219 

During  the  fifth  ballot  Hon.  Ollie  James,  of  Kentucky,  withdrew 
the  name  of  Mr.  Blackburn;  Hon.  John  R.  McLean  announced  the 
withdrawal  of  his  name;  Governor  Stone,  of  Missouri,  withdrew  the 
name  of  Mr.  Bland;  Hon.  A.  Van  Wagenen,  of  Iowa,  withdrew  the 
name  of  Mr.  Boies,  and  Senator  Turpie  withdrew  the  name  of  Gov- 
ernor Matthews. 

On  motion  of  Senator  Turpie  the  nomination  was  made  unanimous. 

Some  of  the  newspapers  have  commented  upon  the  fact  that  the 
nomination  went  to  one  whose  seat  in  the  convention  was  contested. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  while  the  right  of  our  delegation  to  seats  in  the 
convention  was  contested,  there  was  never  any  reason  for  the  contest. 
Our  title  to  seats  was  as  unquestionable  as  that  of  any  delegation  in  the 
convention.  I  have,  in  previous  chapters,  described  the  contest  as  it 
developed  in  Nebraska.  The  bolting  delegation,  which  was  seated 
by  the  National  Committee,  was  sent  by  an  organization  which  found 
its  origin  in  a  convention  precisely  like  the  convention  which  assem- 
bled at  Indianapolis  in  September,  1896. 

Our  delegation  established  headquarters  at  the  Clifton  House,  just 
across  the  street  from  the  Palmer  House,  where  something  like  a 
hundred  Nebraska  Democrats  gathered  daily,  ready  at  all  times  to 
defend  the  principles  set  forth  in  the  Chicago  platform. 

I  may  add  for  the  encouragement  of  those  who  still  believe  that 
money  is  not  necessary  to  secure  a  Presidential  nomination  that  my 
entire  expenses  while  in  attendance  upon  the  convention  were  less  than 
$100. 

It  gives  me  pleasure  to  testify  to  the  fact  that  those  who  were  promi- 
nent in  the  contest  for  the  Presidential  nomination  gave  loyal  and  en- 
thusiastic support  to  the  ticket.  Mr.  Bland,  whose  vote  was  next  to 
my  own,  devoted  himself  to  the  cause  with  voice  and  pen.  Mr.  Black- 
burn visited  all  parts  of  the  Union  and  responded  to  every  call.  Mr. 
Boies  did  effective  work  upon  the  stump  during  the  entire  campaign. 
Mr.  McLean,  as  a  member  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  National 
Committee,  was  an  invaluable  counselor  and  gave  most  efficient  aid. 
Mr.  Matthews  was  actively  at  work  from  the  adjournment  of  the  con- 
vention to  the  closing  of  the  polls.  Mr.  Pattison,  while  not  in  accord 
with  some  parts  of  the  platform,  still  supported  the  ticket.  Mr.  Tillman, 
who,  while  his  name  was  not  placed  in  nomination,  received  the  vote  of 
his  State  on  the  first  ballot,  delivered  a  large  number  of  speeches  in  sup- 
port of  the  platform  and  ticket.  Vice-President  Stevenson,  who, 
though  not  formally  a  candidate,  received  several  votes  in  the  conven- 


220 


THE  PRESIDENTIAL  NOMINATION. 


tion,  promptly  placed  himself  at  the  disposal  of  the  National  Committee 
and  spoke  in  several  States.  Mr.  Sibley,  who,  notwithstanding  his 
refusal  to  be  a  candidate,  received  a  large  vote  for  the  Vice-Presidency, 
was  a  zealous  supporter  and  untiring  in  his  efforts  in  behalf  of  the 
ticket. 


CHAPTER  XII. 


MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINATION. 

WHEN  the  convention  met  on  Saturday  morning  it  proceeded 
to  the  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the  Vice-Presidency. 
Hon.  T.  J.  O'SuUivan,  of  Massachusetts,  prese^ited  the 
name  of  ex-Congressman  George  Fred  Williams. 

Hon.  W.  B.  Marston,  of  Louisiana,  brought  forward  the  name  of 
Hon.  John  R.  McLean,  of  Ohio.  The  nomination  was  seconded  by 
Hon.  Ulric  Sloan,  of  Ohio. 

Hon.  J.  H.  Currie,  of  North  Carolina,  presented  the  name  of  Judge 
Walter  Clark,  of  that  State. 

Hon.  Thomas  Maloney,  of  Washington,  presented  the  name  of 
Hon.  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  of  that  State. 

Hon.  George  W.  Fithian,  of  Illinois,  was  placed  in  nomination  by 
Hon.  Tom  Johnson,  of  Ohio. 

Hon.  M.  A.  Miller,  of  Oregon,  presented  the  name  of  ex-Gov- 
ernor Sylvester  Pennoyer,  of  that  State. 

Hon.  Arthur  Sewall,  of  Maine,  was  placed  in  nomination  by  Hon. 
William  R.  Burk,  of  California.  The  nominating  speech  was  as  fol- 
lows : 

Mr.  Chairman  and  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  What 
I  say  to  you  at  this  juncture  I  know  in  one  respect  will  commend  itself 
to  you.  I  shall  be  brief.  Gentlemen,  taking  into  account  the  great  mission 
which  has  called  us  into  convention,  it  seems  to  me  that  we  should  consider 
matters  far  beyond  the  reach  of  this  great  body.  We  should  consider  that  there 
are  people  whom  we  represent  who  have  to  vote  on  this  great  question,  and 
those  people  represent  forty-seven  of  the  great  Northern  States,  starting  from 
Maine,  reaching  to  the  Pacific,  touching  the  Atlantic  coast  on  the  south  and 
extending  far  beyond  into  the  State  of  Texas.  Therefore,  Mr.  Chairman,  as 
I  have  said,  geographical  consideration  should  prompt  us,  as  well  as  the  ques- 
tion of  ability. 

It  would  not  become  me  to  say  aught  of  any  gentleman  whose  name  has 
been  brought  before  you  in  this  connection.  I  would  not  say  aught  of  the 
gentleman  from  North  Carolina  or  from  Oregon  or  from  any  of  the  great 
Western  States,  but  it  seems  to  me  that  when  we  come  to  make  up  the  remain- 
ing portion  of  this  ticket  we  should  consider  those  States  beyond  the  Blue 
Ridge  mountains,  and  in  that  connection  I  present  a  candidate  who  represents 

13  221 


222  MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINATION. 

every  element  which  is  presented  to  you  in  your  platform  and  in  your  distin- 
guished candidate  for  the  President,  William  J.  Bryan.  I  take  pleasure  in  pre- 
senting for  your  careful  consideration  the  name  of  Arthur  Sewall,  of  Maine. 
Mr.  President,  it  may  be  well  said  of  him,  in  connection  with  the  great  questions 
involved  in  this  matter  and  the  interests  which  are  before  you,  that  he  will 
fulfill  the  pledges  which  have  been  made  by  your  platform  at  this  time.  You 
will  make  no  mistake  in  nominating  him. 

The  nomination  was  seconded  by  Hon.  C.  S.  Thomas,  of  Colorado, 
and  Hon.  John  Scott,  of  Maine. 

Hon.  Joseph  C.  Sibley,  of  Pennsylvania,  was  placed  in  nomination 
by  Hon.  J.  D.  Shewalter,  of  Missouri.  The  nomination  was  seconded 
by  Hon.  Free  P.  Morris,  of  Illinois,  and  by  Hon.  George  W.  Fithian 
of  the  same  State,  who  at  the  same  time  announced  that  he  himself  was 
not  a  candidate. 

Governor  C.  A.  Culbertson,  of  Texas,  on  behalf  of  the  delegates 
from  his  State,  placed  before  the  convention  the  name  of  Hon.  Richard 
P.  Bland,  of  Missouri. 

Judge  O.  W.  Powers,  of  Utah,  presented  the  name  of  Senator  J. 
W.  Daniels,  of  Virginia.  When  Mr.  Powers  had  finished,  Hon.  W. 
A.  Jones,  of  Virginia,  announced  that  while  the  delegates  from  that 
State  appreciated  the  beautiful  tribute  which  had  been  paid  to  Senator 
Daniel,  he  would  not  permit  the  use  of  his  name  in  connection  with 
that  office. 

Mr.  Sewall  was  nominated  on  the  fifth  ballot.  I  give  the  vote  on 
the  several  ballots: 


MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINATION. 


223 


FIRST   BALLOT. 


STATES. 

■< 

H 
O 

M 

pa 

< 

03 

■<  to 

0 

1 

< 

4 

01^ 

H 

3 

S5 
» 
B 
W 
0 
<! 

CO 

ai 

S 
CQ 

4 

'7 

i 

M 
» 

< 

w 
'2 

3 

'6 
8 

19 

H 

3 

'8 
11 

s 

SB 
P 

6 
11 

0 

X 

< 

2 
2 

!5 

< 

w 

ts 

H 

M 
ft- 

i 

1 

pi 

H 

i 

i 
1 

H 

tt 

1 

H  ^  0 
«§| 

Ul  P  b 

Alabama    

22 

16 

18 

8 

12 

6 

8 

26 

6 

48 

30 

26 

20 

26 

16 

12 

16 

30 

28 

18 

18 

34 

6 

16 

6 

8 

20 

72 

22 

6 

46 

8 

64 

8 

18 

8 

24 

30 

6 

8 

24 
8 
12 
24 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 

930 

4 
16 
10 

4 

4 

"i 

4 

. 

Arkansas 

California 

.... 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

10 

Delaware 

1 

91 

Florida 

8 

26 
6 

"■4 

"4 

ie 

Georgia 

Idaho  

Illinois 

48 

2 

14 

is 

••'4 

11 
20 

1 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

21 

4 

Louisiana 

Maine 

"io 

6 

"b 

'28 

"6 

12 

"2 

18 

10 

6 

Maryland 

11 

Massachusetts 

Michigan 

30 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

5 

Missouri 

3 

22 

15 

Montana 

.... 

Nebraska 

16 

Nevada 

New  Hampshire 

New  Jersey 

8 
?0 

New  York 

7? 

North  Carolina 

North  Dakota 

Ohio 

'"8 

7 

46 

6 

.... 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode  Island 

"65 
?! 

South  Carolina 

South  Dakota 

Tennessee 

18 
"7 

••■4 

'9 

20 

30 

24 
50 

22 

20 

Utah 

"4 

Vermont 

4 

Virginia 

Washington 

"12 

""6 

"6 

76 

62 

West  Virgina 

Wisconsin 

5 
6 

19 

Wyoming 

0 

Arizona 

Dist.  of  Columbia 

New  Mexico 

6 

Oklahoma 

163 

111 

4 
6 

100 

Indian  Territory 

Totals 

2fi0 

224 


MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMmATlON. 


SECOND   BALLOT. 


STATES. 

n 

< 

OQ 

a 

< 

» 
•< 

09 

H 

M 

K 
M 

< 

S 

H 

04 

^1 

5m 

Alabama 

22 
16 

18 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

8 

Connecticut 

2 
3 

10 

Delaware 

1 

8 

26 

6 

2 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho 

Illinois 

48 

Indiana 

15 

15 

Iowa 

26 

Kansas 

20 
2 

Kentucky 

1 

16 
16 

6 

1 

Louisiana 

Maine 

8 

4 

Maryland 

5 

11 

9 

21 

Michigan 

28 

6 

18 

4 

2 

6 

Mississippi 

5 

10 

6 

"6 

13 

Montana 

Nebraska 

16 

Nevada 

6 

New  Hampshire 

8 

New  Jersey 

20 

New  York 

72 

North  Carolina 

22 

6 

Ohio 

46 

Oregon 

4 
5 

4 
2 

Pennsylvania 

f^ 

Rhode  Island 

8 

South  Carolina 

18 

South  Dakota ; . . . . 

8 

Tennessee 

24 

30 
6 
4 

24 
3 

12 
3 
6 

Texas  

Utah 

Vermont 

4 

Virginia 

Washington 

6 

West  Virginia 

Wisconsin 

2 

19 

Wyoming 

6 

Arizona 

6 
6 
6 
6 
6 

294 

District  of  Columbia 

New  Mexico 

Oklahoma 

Indian  Territory 

Totals 

118 

158 

37 

16 

22 

13 

21 

1 

955 

MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINATION. 


225 


THIRD  BALLOT. 


STATES. 

M 

CO 

1 

0 

M 
M 

■< 

6 

H 

< 

i 

SE 

•< 

Q 

i. 
0 

m 

•< 

Si 

Alabama 

22 

Arkansas 

16 

18 
8 

California 

. ... 

Colorado 

.... 

Connecticut 

\9, 

Delaware 

1 
8 

3 

? 

Florida 

Georgia 

26 
6 

Idaho  

Illinois 

48 

Indiana 

30 
26 

Iowa 

Kansas 

20 
3 

Kentucky 

16 
16 

7 

Louisiana 

Maine 

12 

Maryland 

5 

11 

Massachusetts 

9 

?1 

Michigan 

28 

5 

18 

2 

3 

8 

Mississippi 

34 
6 

Montana 

Nebraska 

16 

Nevada  

6 

New  Hampshire 

8 

New  Jersey 

?0 

New  York ». 

7^ 

North  Carolina 

22 

North  Dakota 

6 

Ohio 

46 

Oregon 

8 

Pennsylvania 

3 

4 

56 

Rhode  Island 

8 

South  Carolina 

18 

.... 

South  Dakota 

8 

Tennessee 

24 
30 

Texas 

Utah 

6 

24 
6 

4 

Virginia 

Washington 

4 
"2 

"e 

West  Virginia 

6 

19 

Wyoming 

Alaska 

6 

Arizona    

6 

District  of  Columbia  

New  Mexico 

6 

Oklahoma 

6 
6 

97 

Indian  Territory 

Totals 

50 

210 

15 

255 

22 

19 

6 

1 

255 

226 


MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINATION. 


FOURTH    BALLOT. 


STATES. 

< 
u 

< 

a 

<3 

B 

z 

s 

M 

H 

•< 

-I 

11 

Alabama 

22 

16 

16 

8 

Arkansas 

... 

California 

2 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

12 

Delaware 

1 
8 

3 

2 

Florida 

Georgia 

26 

Idaho  

6 

Illinois 

48 
30 
26 

Indiana 

. ... 

Iowa 

Kansas 

20 
10 

Kentucky - 

16 
16 

Louisiana 

Maine 

12 

Maryland 

9 

7 

Massachusetts 

9 

21 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

28 
11 

18 

7 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

34 
4 

.... 

Montana 

2 

Nebraska 

16 

Nevada 

6 

New  Hampshire 

8 

N  ew  Jersey 

?0 

New  York 

• 

72 

22 

North  Dakota 

6 

46 

Oregon 

8 
3 

4 

56 

Rhode  Island 

8 

18 

8 

24 

South  Dakota 

Texas 

20 
6 

Vermont         

4 

4 

24 

Washington 

8 

12 

Wisconsin 

5 

19 

6 

Alaska 

6 

6 

District  of  Columbia 

6 

6 
6 
6 

261 

Oklahoma 

Indian  Territory 

298 

9 

46 

11 

54 

1 

^fiO 

MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINA  TION 


227 


FIFTH   BALLOT. 


STATES. 

•< 
» 

o 

hi 

i 
t 

CO 

22 
16 
16 

8 

03 

>j  < 

M 

o 

H 

W 

< 

Si 

II 

Alabama 

Arkansas 

California 

2 

.... 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

1? 

Delaware 

1 

8 
26 

6 
48 
30 
26 
20 
26 
16 
12 

9 

3 

2 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

7 

Massachusetts 

9 

21 

Michigan 

28 
11 

.... 

7 

Mississippi 

18 

34 
6 

Montana    

Nebraska 

16 

Nevada 

6 

New  Hampshire 

8 

New  Jersey       

20 

7?, 

North  Carolina 

22 

North  Dakota 

6 

46 
8 
6 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 

67 

Rhode  Island 

8 

South   Carolina 

18 

8 

24 

South   Dakota 

Tennessee >. 

Texas 

30 
6 

Utah 

Vermont    

4 

Virginia            

24 
8 

12 
4 
6 

^^est  Virginia            .         . . 

Wisconsin     

1 

.... 

19 

Alaska   

6 

6 

6 

6 
6 
6 

668 

Totals 

32 

9 

22 

11 

36 

1 

251 

228  MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINATION. 

Before  the  first  ballot  was  announced,  the  name  of  Mr.  Pennoyer 
was  withdrawn  and  the  vote  of  the  State  changed  from  Pennoyer  to 
SiBley.  When  the  Nebraska  delegation  was  reached,  Hon.  C.  J.  Smyth, 
the  chairman  of  the  delegation,  said: 

Nebraska,  grateful  for  the  very  high  honor  that  has  been  conferred,  is  pre- 
pared to  accept  the  result  of  the  combined  wisdom  of  this  convention  and  is  not 
willing  to  take  any  part  in  this  contest. 

The  delegation  did  not  vote  upon  any  of  the  ballots  until,  at  the 
conclusion  of  the  fifth  ballot,  it  was  evident  that  Mr.  Sewall  had  been 
nominated.  Then  the  delegation  announced  sixteen  votes  for  the 
nominee.  The  refusal  to  vote  was  in  accordance  with  my  expressed 
wish.  As  I  did  not  myself  take  any  part  in  the  nomination  of  the 
candidate  for  Vice-President  I  thought  it  better  that  the  delegation 
from  Nebraska  should  also  decline  to  participate,  lest  the  vote  of  the 
delegation  might  be  considered  an  expression  of  my  preference. 

During  the  progress  of  the  second  ballot  Governor  Stone  an- 
nounced that  the  Missouri  delegation  had  no  authority  to  present  the 
name  of  Mr.  Bland,  and  that  therefore  Missouri  divided  her  vote  among 
other  candidates.  Before  the  result  of  the  second  ballot  was  an- 
nounced, Hon.  Amos  Cummings  read  the  following  dispatch: 

Meadville,  Pa.,  July  nth. 
Hon.  Amos  Cummings:     Please  do  not  permit  my  name  to  be  presented. 
I  so  instructed  my  friends  yesterday.  Joseph  C.  Sibley. 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  third  ballot  Governor  Stone  obtained 
recognition  and  said: 

I  desire,  on  behalf  of  Missouri,  and  as  the  friend  of  Mr.  Bland,  to  express 
to  you  our  grateful  appreciation  of  your  kindness.  I  am  now  in  receipt  of  a 
telegram  from  Mr.  Bland,  in  which  he  says  substantially  that  he  would  deem 
it  unwise  and  impolitic  to  nominate  both  candidates  from  the  west  side  of  the 
Mississippi  River.  He  directs  rrie  to  say  that  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Bryan  has 
his  warm  and  hearty  approval,  and  he  thinks  the  nomination  for  the  Vice- 
Presidency  should  be  made  with  one  object  alone  in  view,  and  that  is  of 
strengthening  the  ticket.  Accordingly,  he  directs  me  to  say  that  he  wishes  his 
name  withdrawn  from  the  consideration  of  this  convention  for  that  purpose. 

During  the  progress  of  the  fourth  ballot,  Mr.  Long,  of  Ohio,  ob- 
tained the  floor  and  said: 

Two  telegrams  have  been  received  by  the  Ohio  delegation  from  Mr. 
McLean.  They  state  substantially  what  I  stated  here  in  the  opening — that  he 
is  not  a  candidate,  but  that  you  may  have  the  exact  words,  I  read  his  telegram. 
He  speaks  for  himself  and  for  the  Ohio  delegation:  "Any  vote  cast  for  me  for 
Vice-President  is  against  my  expressed  wish  and  without  my  authority.  Please 
so  announce  to  the  convention."  That  is  Mr.  McLean's,  not  the  Ohio  delega- 
tion's, statement 


MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINA  TION.  229 

The  nomination  of  Mr.  Sewall  was  made  unanimous,  and  after  reso- 
lutions complimenting  Temporary  Chairman  Daniel,  Permanent  Chair- 
man White  and  Acting  Chairman  Richardson,  together  with  Chairman 
Harrity,  of  the  National  Committee,  the  convention  adjourned  sine  die. 

While  I  had  known  of  Mr.  Sewall's  advocacy  of  free  sflver  as  a 
member  of  the  National  Committee,  I  was  not  personally  acquainted 
with  him  until  the  convention  met.  My  first  meeting  with  him  oc- 
curred just  after  I  had  concluded  my  speech  in  favor  of  the  adoption 
of  the  platform  reported  by  the  majority  of  the  committee.  He  came 
to  announce  himself  in  favor  of  my  nomination  for  the  Presidency,  and 
to  suggest  the  advisability  of  proceeding  at  once  to  the  nomination. 
A  similar  suggestion  was  made  by  others,  but  I  asked  our  delegation 
to  take  no  part  in  the  matter  and  leave  the  convention  to  adjourn  or 
proceed,  according  to  the  decision  of  the  other  delegations. 

After  his  nomination  he  called  upon  me  at  the  hotel,  and  we 
exchanged  congratulations.  As  I  knew  him  better,  acquaintance 
ripened  into  friendship  and  I  learned  to  esteem  him  for  his  many 
sterling  qualities. 

He  stood  squarely  upon  the  Chicago  platform,  and  was  ready  to 
defend  it  at  all  times.  Although  in  possession  of  a  large  income,  he 
favored  an  income  tax;  although  connected  with  a  national  bank,  he 
was  opposed  to  the  law  which  allowed  national  banks  to  issue  cur- 
rency. The  fact  that  he  advocated  free  coinage  and  the  income  tax 
and  opposed  banks  of  issue,  notwithstanding  the  influences  which 
surrounded  him,  demonstrated  both  the  depth  of  his  convictions  and 
his  possession  of  moral  courage. 

I  give  below  a  biographical  sketch : 

Biographical  Sketch  of  Hon.  Arthur  Sewall. 
Arthur  Sewall,  third  son  of  William  Dunning  and  Rachel  Trufant 
Sewall,  was  born  in  Bath,  Maine,  Thanksgiving  Day,  1835.  His 
father  was  a  prominent  merchant  and  ship  builder  of  Bath,  and  Sen- 
ator in  the  Legislature  of  his  State.  His  grandfather  was  Joseph 
Sewall,  of  Bath.  His  great-grandfather  was  Drummer  Sewall,  who 
settled  at  Bath,  1762,  was  an  officer  of  the  French  and  Indian  war, 
and  of  the  Continental  army,  was  muster  master  for  the  Province  of 
Maine  to  the  close  of  the  Revolution,  and  afterwards  a  member  of 
the  Massachusetts  Convention  of  1788,  called  to  ratify  the  Federal 
Constitution,  and  of  the  different  conventions  called  to  secure  the 
separation  of  Maine  from  Massachusetts.  He  was  fifth  in  descent 
from  Henry  Sewall,  Mayor  of  Coventry,  England,  whose  grandson 
married  Jane  Dummer.  and  emigrated  to  Newbury,  Mass.,  1634. 


230  MR.  SEWALL'S  NOMINA  TION. 

Arthur  Sewall  was  educated  in  the  common  schools  of  Bath.  At 
an  early  age  he  went  from  Bath  to  Prince  Edward's  Island,  trading 
and  securing  ship  timber,  which  he  sent  to  the  ship  yards  of  the 
Kennebec.  Returning  when  less  than  twenty  years  of  age,  he  entered 
his  father's  ship  yard,  and  in  1854,  formed  a  partnership  with  his 
senior  brother,  Edward,  under  the  name  of  E.  &  A.  Sewall,  taking 
the  business  of  the  old  firm. 

In  January,  1855,  the  two  brothers  launched  their  first  ship,  the 
"Holyhead,"  of  over  1,000  tons  burden,  a  large  ship  in  those  days, 
followed  the  same  year  by  another.  In  the  twenty-four  years  of 
their  partnership  they  built  thirty-nine  vessels  of  the  largest  tonnage 
for  their  class  and  time. 

In  1879,  upon  the  death  of  his  elder  brother,  the  firm  name  was 
changed  to  Arthur  Sewall  &  Co.,  the  partners  of  which  are  Mr.  Sewall 
and  his  nephew,  Samuel  Sewall,  and  his  second  son,  William  D. 
Sewall.  Under  the  present  firm,  the  activity  in  ship  building  con- 
tinued, and  in  1890  they  launched  the  ship  "Rappahannock,"  of  over 
3,000  tons  burden,  then  the  largest  wooden  ship  in  the  world,  as  had 
been  a  former  "Rappahannock"  launched  by  William  D.  Sewall,  half 
a  century  before. 

Then  followed  the  "Shenandoah,"  Susquehanna,"  and  the  "Roa- 
noke," the  latter  being  at  the  time  of  her  launch,  as  she  is  now,  the 
largest  wooden  ship  afloat.  In  1893  the  yard  was  fitted  with  a  steel 
plant,  and  from  it  was  launched  the  next  year  the  "Dirigo,"  the  first 
steel  sailing  ship  built  in  America. 

Through  the  present  era  of  decadence  of  our  merchant  marine,  Mr. 
Sewall  has  never  lost  faith  that  ultimately  the  United  States  would 
regain  its  power  and  pre-eminence  on  the  seas. 

Aside  from  his  work  as  a  ship  builder,  he  has  had  part  in  opening 
up  the  resources  of  his  native  State.  His  father  had  been  a  pioneer  in 
the  railroad  development  of  Maine,  and  he  succeeded  him  as  director 
of  Maine's  chief  railway  system,  of  which  later  he  was  for  nine  years 
the  president.  He  also  has  been  connected  with  railroad  and  other 
enterprises  in  the  South  and  West  and  in  Mexico.  He  has  been 
for  twenty-six  years  president  of  the  Bath  National  Bank. 

He  married  in  1859  Miss  Emma  Duncan  Crooker,  and  has  two 
sons,  Harold  Marsh  and  William  Dunning  Sewall,  and  four  grand- 
children. His  religious  faith  is  that  of  the  New  (Swedenborgian) 
church. 

In.  politics  he  has  always  been  a  Democrat,  and  as  a  member  of 


MR.  SEWALUS  NOMINATION.  231 

the  minority  party  of  his  city  and  State  has  held  but  few  elective 
offices.  From  his  own  party,  however,  he  has  received  frequent  proofs 
of  confidence. 

He  was  delegate  to  the  National  Democratic  Convention  at  Balti- 
more, which  nominated  Greeley  in  1872,  and  again  to  that  at  Cincin- 
nati, which  nominated  Hancock  in  1880.  He  was  also  a  delegate 
at  large  to  the  convention  which  nominated  Cleveland  in  1884.  I^ 
1888  he  was  present  at  the  Democratic  Convention  at  St.  Louis,  and 
was  then  elected  a  member  of  the  Democratic  National  Committee, 
and  was  a  member  of  the  executive  committee  of  that  organization 
for  the  campaign  of  that  year. 

He  attended  the  Chicago  Convention  of  1892,  and  was  again 
elected  to  the  National  Committee  and  made  a  member  of  the  Execu- 
tive Committee. 

In  1893  he  was  the  nominee  and  unanimous  choice  of  his  party  for 
United  States  Senator,  against  Eugene  Hale,  Republican. 

His  views  on  public  questions  have  always  been  positive  and  un- 
concealed. He  believes  in  an  American  policy,  commercial,  foreign 
and  financial. 

Of  the  free  coinage  of  silver  he  has  always  been  an  advocate,  and 
believes  it  must  be  the  basis  of  any  financial  policy.  He  is  opposed 
to  the  present  national  banking  system,  although  business  necessities 
have  forced  him  to  avail  himself  of  it.  On  this  point  and  on  the 
issue  of  free  coinage  he  expressed  himself  at  the  time  of  his  nomi- 
nation, as  follows: 

There  are  thousands  of  business  men  in  the  East  who  are  turning  away 
from  the  single  gold  standard.  It  is  not  a  class  issue.  In  my  opinion  there  is 
not  a  legitimate  business  in  this  country  but  that  would  be  benefited  by  the 
restoration  of  silver  to  its  rightful  place  in  our  national  currency.  I  have  been 
an  advocate  of  silver  ever  since  Congress  demonetized  that  metal  in  1873.  I 
held  at  the  time  that  a  mistake  had  been  made,  and  have  had  no  reason  since  to 
change  my  mind.  There  are  two  sides  to  every  question,  and  as  an  individual 
banker,  I  have  a  perfect  right  to  take  a  position  opposite  to  those  who  con- 
stitute the  majority  in  the  banking  busincoS.  As  I  said  before,  this  is  not  a 
technical  question  nor  a  class  issue. 

As  a  member  of  the  National  Committee  he  opposed  the  gold 
men  at  every  point  in  the  preliminary  organization  of  the  Chicago 
Convention,  and  voted  for  Daniel  against  Hill  for  temporary  chairman. 
In  consequence  of  this  action  he  was  dropped  by  the  Maine  dele- 
gation from  the  National  Committee.  On  the  same  day  he  tele- 
graphed his  wife  that  he  was  now  out  of  politics  forever  and  for 


232  MR.  SBVALL'S  NOMINATION. 

good.     Within  thirty-six  hours  he  was  nominated  for  the  second 
highest  position  within  the  gift  of  his  party. 

Unexpected  and  unsought  as  was  this  nomination,  Mr.  Sewall 
recognized  at  once  the  honor  it  conferred  and  the  duty  it  imposed. 
Of  the  convention  he  said  in  reply  to  an  address  of  welcome  home 
from  his  fellow  citizens  of  Bath: 

We  have  had  a  convention,  and  it  is  of  that  I  would  speak  to  you.  It  was  a 
great  convention,  yet  it  did  not  seem  to  me  to  be  a  partisan  one.  It  seemed 
more  like  the  uprising  of  the  people,  and  they  seemed  to  be  controlled  by  one 
idea,  and  that  idea  has  filled  me  for  years.  They  knew  that  this  country  is  in 
deep  distress,  that  it  has  been  in  distress  for  years,  and  that  the  great  trouble 
is  with  our  monetary  system,  and  they  believed,  as  I  believe,  that  there  is  but 
one   remedy. 

They  entertain  no  dishonest  or  dishonorable  idea,  but  they  demand  that 
we  be  carried  back  to  the  money  of  our  fathers,  to  that  monetary  system 
under  which  this  Government  flourished  for  so  many  years;  and  they  believe 
that  is  the  only  road  to  prosperity. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


HOMEWARD  BOUND. 

AFTER  a  Sunday's  rest  at  the  home  of  Mrs.  Lyman  Trumbull, 
and  a  visit  to  the  newly  made  grave  of  her  husband,  we  left 
Chicago  early  in  the  afternoon  of  Monday,  the  13th,  accom- 
panied by  a  party  of  newspaper  correspondents.  Business  called  me  to 
Salem,  Illinois,  my  birthplace,  and  this  made  our  homeward  journey 
rather  a  roundabout  one.  We  found  the  people  assembled  along  the  line 
at  the  more  important  stations,  and  it  was  necessary  to  respond  to  sev- 
eral calls  for  a  speech.  The  largest  crowds  were  gathered  at  Champaign 
and  Mattoon.  At  the  former  place  I  met  General  Busey,  with  whom 
I  had  become  well  acquainted  while  in  Congress.  At  Odin  we  changed 
cars,  and  while  waiting  for  the  train  had  an  opportunity  to  meet  many 
old  acquaintances.  When  we  reached  Salem,  we  found  the  town 
illuminated  and  the  citizens  out  en  masse.  We  were  escorted  to  the 
home  of  my  sister,  Mrs.  Baird,  where  we  greeted  relatives  and  friends. 
The  next  day  a  brief  visit  was  made  to  Centralia,  where  a  largely  at- 
tended reception  had  been  prepared.  On  Wednesday,  a  meeting — for 
Salem  a  very  large  one — was  held  in  the  court  house  yard.  Hon. 
L.  M.  Kagy,  who  was  for  two  years  my  law  school  classmate  and 
roommate,  presided,  and  nearly  all  the  Democrats  and  Populists,  and 
many  Republicans,  took  part.  As  the  meeting  was,  to  some  extent, 
non-partisan,  I  tried  to  avoid  political  questions. 

Salem  Speech, 
Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I  have  no  disposition  to  talk 
politics  today,  and  shall  leave  the  discussion  of  public  questions  to  those  who 
are  to  follow  me.  Returning  to  the  scenes  which  surround  my  early  home, 
the  memories  of  early  days  crowd  out  all  thoughts  of  the  subject  upon  which 
we  may  differ.  I  remember  with  such  grateful  appreciation  the  kindly  feeling 
which  has  always  been  manifested  toward  me  here,  regardless  of  church  or 
party  lines,  that  I  shall  say  nothing  to  divide  upon  any  subject  those  who 
are  assembled  today.  This  is  the  place  of  my  birth,  of  my  boyhood  and  of 
my  early  manhood.  Three  blocks  south  of  this  spot  I  first  saw  the  light  of 
day;  a  little  to  the  northwest  I  lived  from  the  age  of  six  until  I  was  twenty- 
three,  and  I  shall  never  cease  to  be  grateful  to  the  parents  who  took  me  to 
the  farm  and  there  allowed  me  to  acquire  during  vacation  days  the  physical 
strength  which  will  be  needed  in  the  campaign  upon  which  I  am  entering. 
It  was  in  this  court  house,  by  the  side  of  which  we  meet  today,  that  I  first 

233 


234  HOMEWARD  BOUND. 

conceived  the  ambition  to  be  a  lawyer;  it  was  in  this  same  court  house  that 
I  afterward  made  my  first  political  speech;  it  was  at  the  fair  grounds  near  here 
that  I  delivered  my  first  Fourth  of  July  address.  It  was  to  the  parental  roof,  then 
just  outside  of  the  limits  of  the  city,  that  I  brought  her  who  had  promised  to 
share  life's  joys  and  sorrows  with  me.  All  these  happy  associations  rise  today 
before  me  and  leave  me  no  desire  to  think  of  other  things.  I  cannot  forget 
Salem,  nor  can  I  forget  those  whose  kindly  faces  smiled  upon  me  here  before 
fortune  smiled.  I  cannot  forget  the  spot  near  by,  the  silent  city  of  the  dead, 
where  rest  the  ashes  of  the  father  whose  upright  life  has  been  an  inspiration 
to  me  and  whose  counsels  lingered  in  my  ears  after  he  was  gone — the  spot 
where  rest  also  the  ashes  of  a  mother  as  tender  and  as  true,  as  patient,  as 
gentle  and  as  kind  as  God  in  His  infinite  love  ever  gave  to  man. 

It  was  in  this  city  that  I  received  my  first  instructions  in  democracy — I 
do  not  use  the  word  in  a  party  sense,  but  in  the  broader  sense  in  which 
democracy  recognizes  the  brotherhood  of  man.  It  was  here  that  I  learned 
the  truth  expressed  by  the  poet,  that  "Honor  and  fame  from  no  condition 
rise."  It  was  here  that  I  learned  that  clothes  do  not  make  the  man;  that  all  who 
contribute  to  the  nation's  greatness  and  have  the  good  of  the  country  at  heart — 
no  matter  what  their  position  in  life,  their  ancestry  or  their  surroundings — stand 
upon  a  common  ground  and  share  in  a  common  citizenship.  It  was  here,  too, 
that  I  was  taught  to  believe  in  freedom  of  conscience — that  principle  which  must 
go  hand  in  hand  with  a  broad  democracy;  that  every  man  has  a  right  to  worship 
God  according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience,  and  that  no  government 
like  ours  can  dictate  how  a  man  shall  serve  his  God. 

There  is  an  ideal  plane  in  politics,  and  I  believe  we  stand  upon  it  here 
today.  We  differ  in  opinion  and  we  differ  in  party  politics,  but  we  meet  today 
recognizing  these  differences  and  yet  each  charitable  toward  the  other.  We 
are  all  imbued  with  the  same  spirit;  we  all  possess  the  same  ambition;  we 
are  all  endeavoring  to  carry  out  the  same  great  purpose.  We  all  want  a 
government  of  the  people,  by  the  people  and  for  the  people.  However  we  may 
differ  as  to  the  means  of  securing  that  kind  of  government,  we  can  differ  as 
honest  citizens — apart  in  judgment  but  together  in  purpose.  I  thank  the  Re- 
publicans who  have  assembled  here;  I  thank  the  Populists;  and  I  thank  the 
Prohibitionists  as  well  as  the.  Democrats,  because  while  we  dispute  about  the 
questions  which  rise  to  the  surface  from  time  to  time  and  agitate  the  people, 
we  all  agree  in  those  great  fundamental  principles  which  underlie  our  form  of 
government.  We  believe  that  all  men  are  created  equal — not  that  they  are 
equal  in  talents  or  in  virtue  or  in  merits,  but  that  wherever  the  government 
comes  into  contact  with  the  citizen,  all  must  stand  equal  before  the  law.  We 
agree  in  the  belief  that  the  government  should  be  no  respecter  of  persons — 
that  its  strength  must  be  used  for  the  protection  of  the  fortunes  of  the  great 
and  the  possessions  of  the  poor,  and  that  it  must  stand  as  an  impartial  arbiter 
between  citizens.  We  agree  in  the  belief  that  there  are  certain  inalienable  rights 
— rights  which  government  did  not  give,  rights  which  government  should 
not  take  away.  We  agree  in  the  belief  that  governments  are  instituted  among 
men  to  secure  and  to  preserve  these  rights,  and  that  they  derive  their  just 
powers  from  the  consent  of  the  government.  We  know  no  divine  right  of 
kings;  the  people  are  the  sovereign  source  of  all  power.     These  citizens  are 


HOMEWARD  BOUND.  235 

the  substantial  foundation  upon  which  our  form  of  government  rests.  While 
our  citizens  appreciate  the  responsibilities  of  citizenship,  and  strive,  each 
in  his  own  way  and  according  to  his  best  judgment,  to  bring  civilization  to 
higher  ground  and  to  make  the  Government  each  year  a  more  fit  expression  of 
the  virtue  and  integrity  of  the  people,  differences  on  minor  issues  need  not 
disturb  them. 

I  have  mentioned  the  basic  principles  upon  which  has  been  reared  this, 
the  greatest  nation  known  to  history.  I  am  a  believer  in  the  progress  of  the 
race.  Talk  not  to  me  about  crises  through  which  we  cannot  pass;  tell  me  not 
of  dangers  that  will  overthrow  us,  or  of  obstacles  too  great  to  overcome;  wf 
know  none  such.  A  brave,  a  heroic,  a  patriotic  people  will  be  prepared  to 
meet  every  emergency  as  it  arises.  Each  generation  is  capable  of  self-govern- 
ment, and  I  believe  that  under  our  institutions  each  generation  will  be  more 
capable  than  the  generation  which  went  before.  Abraham  Lincoln,  in  the 
greatest  of  his  speeches,  said  that  we  had  an  unfinished  work  to  perform. 
Every  generation  receives  from  the  preceding  generation  an  unfinished  work. 
The  works  of  man  are  imperfect.  Mankind  labors  on  from  age  to  age  but 
does  not  reach  perfection.  Every  generation  enjoys  the  blessings  bequeathed 
from  the  generations  past,  and  we  should  strive  to  leave  the  world  better  than  it 
was  when  we  entered  it.  To  such  as  are  gathered  here  and  throughout  the  land 
a  nation  can  look  with  absolute  confidence  for  the  wisdom,  intelligence, 
patriotism  and  courage  which  are  necessary  in  every  hour  of  danger. 

But  I  must  not  talk  longer.  Permit  me  to  thank  you  again  and  again  for 
the  words  which  you  have  spoken  and  for  the  kindly  expression  which  I  see 
on  every  face.  We  know  not  what  may  be  the  result  of  this  campaign;  we  go 
forth  to  do  our  duty  as  we  see  it,  but  what  the  verdict  will  be  we  cannot 
know  until  the  votes  are  counted.  No  matter  whether  the  campaign  results  in 
my  election  or  defeat,  it  cannot  rob  me  of  the  delightful  recollection  of  the 
confidence  and  love  of  the  citizens  of  my  boyhood  home. 

At  another  meeting  in  the  evening  I  spoke  for  a  few  minutes,  con- 
cluding: 

If  there  is  one  lesson  taught  by  six  thousand  years  of  history  it  is  that  truth 
is  omnipotent  and  will  at  last  prevail.  You  may  impede  its  progress,  you  may 
delay  its  triumph;  but  after  awhile  it  will  show  its  irresistible  power,  and  those 
who  stand  in  its  way  will  be  crushed  beneath  it.  You  ask  me  if  these  reforms 
which  we  advocate  will  be  accomplished.  I  say  that  if  they  are  right  they  will 
be  accomplished.  We  who  believe  that  they  are  right  can  only  do  our  best  and 
give  such  impetus  to  them  as  we  are  able  to  give,  and  then  trust  to  the 
righteousness  of  our  cause  to  prevail  over  those  who  oppose  us. 

At  an  early  hour  on  Thursday  morning  we  took  the  train  for 
St.  Louis,  arriving  there  in  time  for  breakfast.  From  St.  Louis  we 
went  to  Kansas  City.  Mr.  Bland  was  upon  this  train  and  was  the 
first  to  greet  us  when  we  entered  the  car.  This  was  the  first  time 
that  I  had  seen  him  since  the  Chicago  Convention,  and  I  was  im- 
pressed by  his  cordiality.  He  traveled  with  us  as  far  as  Jefferson 
City^  acting  as  master  of  ceremonies  at  the  receptions  along  the  way. 


236  HOMEWARD  BOUND. 

At  the  last  mentioned  place  a  large  number  had  assembled  at  the  depot. 
In  introducing  me,  Mr.  Bland  said : 

I  served  with  Mr.  Bryan  four  years  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  and 
know  him  thoroughly.  I  know  his  heart  is  with  the  people  in  this  fight  and  I 
repeat  now,  what  I  have  said  on  other  occasions  today,  that  if  I  had  been  the 
one  to  select  the  leader  in  this  great  contest,  I  would  have  selected  my  friend, 
the  Hon.  William  J.  Bryan. 

This  meeting  gave  me  an  opportunity  to  speak  a  word  in  behalf  of 

Mr.  Bland,  who  had  announced  himself  as  a  candidate  for  Congress. 

I  said: 

Jefferson  Gty  Speech. 

I  have  just  been  wondering  whether  I  could  find  in  all  this  country  a  com- 
bination of  circumstances  which  would  make  a  speech  so  pleasant.  I  am  in  a 
city  named  for  the  greatest  Democrat  who  ever  lived,  Thomas  Jefferson;  in  the 
Congressional  District  of  one  of  the  most  gallant  leaders  that  the  Democracy 
has  ever  known,  Richard  P.  Bland;  in  a  State  presided  over  by  one  of  the  most 
courageous  defenders  of  the  interests  of  the  common  people  that  any  State 
ever  had,  Governor  William  J.  Stone,  and,  to  leave  nothing  more  to  be  desired, 
I  am  in  a  city  whose  Mayor  is  named  Silver.  Now  can  you  think  of  any  com- 
bination that  beats  that?  Thomas  Jefferson,  Dick  Bland,  Bill  Stone  and  Mayor 
Silver — I  feel  at  home  here. 

My  friends,  I  am  glad  to  learn  that  there  is  no  opposition  in  the  Democratic 
party  to  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Bland  for  Congress.  We  need  him  there,  and 
if  it  is  not  to  be  his  privilege  to  sign  a  bill  which  will  restore  silver  to  its  ancient 
place  by  the  side  of  gold,  it  may  be  his  higher  honor  to  introduce  and  give  his 
name  to  a  bill  which,  when  it  becomes  a  law,  will  open  the  mints  of  the  United 
States  to  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  present  legal 
ratio  of  i6  to  i. 

Before  reaching  Kansas  City  we  were  met  by  a  reception  com- 
mittee, and  upon  arrival  were  escorted  to  the  Coates  House.  After  a 
very  pleasant  dinner  with  some  of  the  prominent  advocates  of  bi- 
metallism, the  evening  was  occupied  with  a  short  speech  to  the 
people  who  had  assembled  in  front  of  the  hotel  and  a  reception  in 
the  corridors  of  the  hotel.  Leaving  the  next  morning,  we  found  an 
enthusiastic  throng  at  St.  Joseph  and  similar  gatherings  along  the 
line. 

We  entered  Nebraska  at  Rulo,  a  little  village  situated  in  the  south- 
east corner  of  the  State.  As  the  train  left  the  bridge,  a  salute  was 
fired  by  the  Rulo  Gun  Club,  and  this  gave  one  of  the  eastern  news- 
paper correspondents  an  opportunity  to  inquire  whether  it  was  a 
reception  or  a  holdup.  The  entire  population  seemed  to  be  out;  the 
depot  was  decorated  and  the  towji  was  in  holiday  attire.  This  recep- 
tion was  especially  gratifying  because  we  were  now  among  the  con- 
stituents to  whose  generous  confidence  I  am  indebted  for  two  terms 


HOMEWARD  BOUND.  237 

of  Congressional  life.  At  Falls  City  and  Tecumseh  still  larger  num- 
bers had  gathered.  At  Table  Rock  we  were  met  by  a  reception  com- 
mittee from  Lincoln.  This  committee  was  composed  of  men 
and  women  of  all  parties.  Although  the  weather  was  threaten- 
ing, the  people  of  Lincoln  were  present  at  the  depot  to  welcome  us, 
and  from  the  train  to  our  home  the  noise  was  deafening.  The  day's 
demonstration  was  concluded  with  a  parade,  a  speech  from  the  bal- 
cony of  the  capitol  and  a  reception  within.  As  the  mayor  and  many 
prominent  Republicans  took  part  in  this  reception,  I  was  careful  to 
avoid  political  issues.    I  said  in  part: 

Lincoln  Speech. 

I  am  proud  tonight  to  be  able  to  say  of  those  who  are  assembled  here:  These 
are  our  neighbors.  I  beg  to  express  to  Republicans,  Democrats,  Populists,  Pro- 
hibitionists— to  all  of  all  parties,  the  gratitude  which  we  feel  for  this  magnificent 
demonstration.  I  say  we,  because  she  who  has  shared  my  struggles  deserves  her 
full  share  of  all  the  honors  that  may  come  to  me. 

This  scene  tonight  recalls  the  day,  nine  years  ago  this  month,  when,  by 
accident,  rather  than  design,  I  first  set  foot  within  the  limits  of  the  city  of 
Lincoln.  I  remember  the  day  because  I  fell  in  love  with  the  city,  and  then 
resolved  to  make  it  my  future  home.  I  came  among  you  as  a  stranger  in  a 
strange  land,  and  no  people  have  ever  treated  a  stranger  more  kindly  than 
you  have  treated  me.  I  desire  to  express  tonight  our  grateful  appreciation 
of  all  the  kindness  that  you  have  shown  us,  and  to  give  you  the  assurance 
that  if,  by  the  suffrages  of  my  countrymen,  I  am  called  to  occupy,  for  a 
short  space  of  time,  the  most  honorable  place  in  the  gift  of  the  people, 
I  shall  return  to  you.  This  shall  be  my  home,  and  when  earthly  honors  have 
passed  away  I  shall  mingle  my  ashes  with  the  dust  of  our  beloved  State.  This 
is  no  political  gathering.  I  see  here  the  faces  of  those  who  do  not  stand  with 
me  on  the  issues  of  the  day;  but  I  am  glad  that  love  can  leap  across  party 
lines  and  bind  in  holy  friendship  those  whose  judgments  dwell  apart. 

I  thank  the  Mayor  of  this  city  for  the  charity  which  he  has  shown  today. 
I  thank  those  of  all  parties  who  are  willing  for  a  moment  to  forget  political 
differences  and  join  in  celebrating  the  fact  that  at  last  a  Presidential  nomination 
has  crossed  the  Missouri  river. 

Mileage  on  First  Trip, 

From  Chicago  to  Odin,  111.,  over  Illinois  Central  Ry 240  mile.«i 

From  Odin  to  Salem,  111.,  over  B.  &   O.  S.  W.  Ry 6      " 

From  Salem  to  Centralia  and  return 28 

From  Salem  to  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  over  B.  &  O.  S.  W.  Ry 70     " 

From  St.  Louis  to  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  over  M.  P.  Ry 288 

From  Kansas  City  to  Lincoln,  Neb.,  over  Burlington  Ry 198 

Total  number  miles  traveled  first  trip 830  miles 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

ON  July  22,  1896,  the  National  Silver  Party  Convention  met  at 
St.  Louis  in  pursuance  of  the  call  issued  by  the  Bimetallic 
Union.  Hon.  Francis  G.  Newlands,  of  Nevada,  was  chosen 
temporary  chairman.  Mr.  Newlands  has  for  many  years  been  an 
active  champion  of  bimetallism  and  has  delivered  several  very  strong 
speeches  in  support  of  the  doctrine.     Upon  taking  the  chair  he  said : 

Mr,  Newland's  Speech. 

Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  In  January  last  a  conference  of  the  lead- 
ing bimetallists  of  the  country  was  held  at  Washington.  The  expectation  at 
that  time  was  that  both  the  Democratic  and  Republican  parties  would,  at  the 
coming  national  conventions,  either  declare  for  the  gold  standard,  or  would 
seek  to  deceive  the  voters  by  evasive  platforms,  and  anticipating  this  the  pur- 
pose of  the  conference  was  to  inaugurate  a  new  political  movement  for  the 
unification  of  the  silver  forces  of  the  country  regardless  of  former  political  affili- 
ations. A  national  convention  was  called,  and  as  the  result  of  the  organiza- 
tion which  has  since  taken  place  in  almost  all  the  States  of  the  Union,  the 
National  Silver  party  meets  today  to  determine  what  course  will  best  advance 
the  cause  which  we  have  at  heart. 

The  conventions  of  the  old  parties  have  been  held,  and  have  made  public 
declaration  of  their  principles.  The  Republican  party  has  declared  for  the 
gold  standard.  Practically  this  means  gold  monometallism,  the  system  of 
finance  inaugurated  by  Harrison  and  continued  by  Cleveland.  Silver  is  denied 
its  time-honored  use  as  redemption  money,  and  has  become  simply  the  material 
upon  which  is  stamped  a  good  promise,  and  so  our  greenbacks,  our  Treasury 
notes  and  silver  certificates,-  instead  of  being  money,  have  been  turned  into  a 
gold  debt,  and  the  primary  money  of  the  country  is  confined  to  the  limited 
amount  of  gold  approximating  $500,000,000,  which  an  adverse  balance  of  trade 
is  constantly  depleting  with  all  the  attendant  evils  of  continuing  bond  issues. 

The  Democratic  party  has  declared  for  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of 
silver  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i  without  waiting  for  international  action.  Whilst 
it  has  made  other  declarations  in  its  platform,  it  has  announced  that  the  silver 
question  is  the  paramount  issue  of  the  day,  and  that  to  it  all  other  questions  are 
to  be  subordinated.  It  has  nominated  a  candidate  of  unimpeachable  character, 
of  exalted  ability,  of  inflexible  integrity,  of  high  purpose,  who  has  never  faltered 
for  a  moment  in  his  devotion  to  the  cause  of  bimetallism.  Firm,  but  not  head- 
strong; confident,  but  not  self-sufficient;  near  to  the  people,  but  not  dema- 
gogic; determined  for  reform,  yet  without  a  single  incendiary  speech  or  private 
utterance  to  mar  his  record;  possessing  a  happy  combination  of  the  oratorical 

238 


THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION.  239 

and  logical  qualities;  young,  courageous,  and  enthusiastic,  yet  deliberate  and  wise 
he  stands  as  the  ideal  candidate  of  a  movement,  which,  though  termed  a  move- 
ment for  reform,  really  means  a  return  to  the  wise  conservatism  of  our  fathers. 

The  issue  has  been  presented  by  a  party  which  has  been  recently  discred- 
ited before  the  country  by  the  financial  and  industrial  disturbances  which  it 
has  created  through  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  act,  and  by  threatening .  and 
actual  tariff  legislation.  Dragged  into  financial  agitation  by  the  determined  will 
of  an  executive  whom  it  has  since  repudiated,  it  proposes  not  merely  to  reverse 
legislation  already  enacted,  but  to  go  further  and  to  declare  for  the  free  and 
unlimited  coinage  of  silver;  and  besides  it  proposes  to  guarantee  the  country 
against  further  industrial  disturbances  and  any  agitation  for  further  changes  in 
the  tariff  law,  except  such  as  are  necessary  to  make  up  the  deficit  of  revenue. 
This  latter  announcement  is  particularly  gratifying  to  many  of  us  who  believe 
that  the  silver  question  and  moderate  protection  are  twin  issues;  that  the  for- 
mer means  protection  to  the  American  farmer  against  the  disastrous  competi- 
tion of  silver  countries;  that  the  latter  means  protection  to  the  American  man- 
ufacturer and  his  employes  against  the  disastrous  competition  of  cheap  foreign 
labor,  and  that  it  is  only  by  the  union  of  productive  forces  of  the  country, 
whether  in  the  field  or  in  the  factory,  for  mutual  protection  that  the  remorse- 
less power  of  monetary  contraction  can  be  stayed.  While  it  would  have  been 
wiser  to  confine  the  Democratic  platform  to  issues  concerning  which  bimetal- 
lists  would  not  differ,  thus  securing  the  complete  unification  of  all  the  silver 
forces,  yet  a  simple  question  is  presented  to  sincere  bimetallists  throughout 
the  country,  and  that  is  whether  they  will  permit  differences  as  to  non-essential 
issues  to  divide  them — thus  insuring  the  defeat  of  the  common  cause — or 
whether,  preserving  their  independence  of  conviction  and  action  as  to  non- 
essentials, they  shall  accept  the  brilliant  leader  whom  the  Democratic  party  has 
named,  and,  uniting  all  the  silver  forces  wherever  organized  into  one  invincible 
army,  march  to  victory  in  November  next.  I  apprehend  that  the  singleness  of 
purpose  which  has  thus  far  characterized  this  organization  will  be  apparent 
in  our  deliberations  here,  and  that  its  action  will  be  inspired  by  the  highest 
patriotism  and  by  an  earnest  desire  for  the  advancement  of  the  great  cause 
which  means  so  much  to  humanity. 

And  now,  gentlemen,  before  entering  upon  the  consideration  of  the  plat- 
forms of  the  respective  parties,  let  me  correct  a  misapprehension  indulged  in  so 
largely  by  the  Eastern  press  as  to  the  purpose  of  this  movement.  It  is  not 
intended  to  pay  debts  with  50-cent  dollars  or  to  drive  away  gold  or  to  debase 
our  currency.  Our  purpose  simply  is,  by  increasing  the  coinage  and  use  of 
silver,  and  by  giving  it  equal  privileges  with  gold,  to  raise  its  value,  and  by 
diminishing  the  strain  on  gold  which  gold  monometallism  has  caused,  to  take 
away  its  unjust  appreciation,  and  thus  by  putting  up  the  value  of  silver  and  pull- 
ing down  the  value  of  gold  to  restore  the  old  ratio,  so  that  sixteen  ounces  of 
silver  will  be  worth  (in  bullion  as  well  as  in  coin)  one  ounce  of  gold.  Thus 
the  gold  unit  of  value — the  dollar — based  on  both  metals  instead  of  one,  will 
be  restored,  and  we  shall  have  a  gold  dollar  worth  100  cents  in  silver  and  a 
silver  dollar  worth  100  cents  in  gold. 

If  we  ask  why  this  rate  is  determined  upon,  our  answer  is  not  only  that  that 
has  been  the  customary  ratio  for  years,  but  also  that  the  total  stock  of  silver 


240  THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

coin  in  the  world  is  $4,000,000,000;  that  the  total  stock  of  gold  coin  is  approxi- 
mately the  same,  and  that  if  the  total  stocks  of  silver  and  gold  were  each  melted 
into  a  solid  mass,  the  silver  mass  would  be  about  sixteen  times  as  great  in 
weight  as  the  gold  mass.  We  also  answer  that  today  the  relative  production  of 
the  two  metals  is  approximately  in  the  same  proportion.  We  must  establish  by 
law,  some  relation  of  value  between  the  two  metals.  And  we  propose  to  value 
silver  as  it  will  stand  after  restoration  to  equality  of  privileges  with  gold,  and 
not  while  it  is  discredited  by  unequal  laws. 

The  restoration  of  bimetallism  is  apparent.  It  will  not  only  give  the  world 
an  increasing  volume  of  currency,  proportioned  to  the  increase  of  population 
and  to  the  extension  of  business,  commerce  and  enterprise,  but  it  will  do  away 
with  the  dislocation  of  exchanges  that  has  existed  between  the  gold-standard 
and  silver-standard  countries,  a  dislocation  which  has  immensely  stimulated  the 
production  of  silver-standard  countries  in  farm  products,  and  which  is  about 
to  stimulate  their  manufacturing  production,  to  the  injury  of  the  gold-standard 
countries.  Our  wheat  fields  and  our  cotton  fields  have  already  felt  the  force 
of  silver-standard  competition,  for  the  prices  of  Oriental  and  other  silver- 
standard  countries — always  stable  in  silver — have  declined  in  gold,  just  as  gold 
has  appreciated. 

The  Indian  wheat  grower  receives  today  just  as  he  did  twenty  years  ago,  an 
ounce  of  silver  for  a  bushel  of  wheat;  he  sells  it  for  that  price  to  the  Liverpool 
importer,  who  also  offers  to  the  American  wheat  grower  an  ounce  of  silver, 
which,  formerly  worth  $1.20  in  gold,  is  worth  today  only  65  cents.  The  result 
is  that  the  American  wheat  grower  receives  in  gold  half  of  what  he  received  in 
1873.  And  so  it  is  with  cotton  and  other  farm  products.  The  value  of  our 
exportable  products  with  which  we  pay  our  debts  has  constantly  declined,  in 
gold  the  balance  of  trade  is  against  us,  and  it  must  be  paid  in  gold.  We  pro- 
pose by  restoring  the  old  gold  price  of  silver  to  restore  old  gold  price  of  our 
farm  products,  and  to  change  the  balance  of  trade  with  a  favorable  instead  of  an 
adverse  balance.     That  this  ought  to  be  accomplished  every  one  admits. 

The  Republican  party,  by  its  plea  for  international  adjustment,  admits  that 
the  gold  standard  is  a  bad  thing,  and  that  of  bimetallism  a  good  thing;  but  it 
claims  that  bimetallism  can  only  be  restored  by  international  action.  I  shall 
not  dwell  long  on  this  aspec^t  of  the  question.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the 
Republican  party  limits  our  negotiation  to  the  leading  commercial  nations,  and 
those,  of  course,  are  known  to  be  England,  France  and  Germany.  While  the 
agricultural  and  manufacturing  classes  of  those  countries  are  friendly  to  bimetal- 
lism, and  while  parliamentary  resolutions  favoring  bimetallism  have  been 
passed  in  each,  there  is  no  indication  that  the  executive  department  of  any  of 
those  governments  is  in  any  way  using  its  diplomatic  powers  to  accomplish  it. 
The  fact  is  that  the  executive  department  of  importance,  including  our  own, 
is  directed  in  its  financial  policy  by  the  gold  monopoly.  While  France  indicates 
a  friendliness  for  bimetallism,  and  while  Germany  in  a  measure  has  relaxed  its 
hostility,  both  declare  that  they  will  not  act  without  the  co-operation  of  Eng- 
land, and  England,  through  the  ministry  of  both  her  political  parties,  has 
declared  her  unalterable  purpose  to  adhere  to  the  gold  standard. 

The  reason  is  apparent.  The  great  advance  of  gold  monometallism  has 
given  England  the  control  of  the  credits  of  the  world.     Her  people  now  own 


THB  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION.  241 

bonds  of  other  countries  to  an  amount  aggregating  many  times  the  total  gold 
stock  of  the  world.  England  is  built  up.  Her  narrow  limits  will  not  permit 
much  increase  of  population.  Her  local  property  cannot  be  much  increased  in 
value.  By  her  manufactures  and  her  extended  commerce  she  has  invaded  every 
country  with  her  forces  of  industry  and  enterprise,  and  she  has  accumulated 
the  gold  of  the  world,  and  she  now  loans  it  over  and  over  again  to  the  coun- 
tries from  which  she  has  made  profit.  Her  wealth  consists  mainly  of  credits; 
and  the  creditor  class  has  become  the  dominating  power.  England  has  always 
been  a  class-governed  country.  The  land-owning  class,  once  so  controlling, 
gave  way  to  the  manufacturing  class  under  the  leadership  of  Cobden;  and  the 
corn  laws  prostrated  the  agricultural  interests.  The  manufacturing  class  has 
now  yielded  to  the  creditor  or  banking  class,  which  today  dominates  the  coun- 
cils of  England,  fixes  her  policies  and  enters  her  decrees. 

The  friends  of  bimetallism  stood  expectant  when  Balfour  came  into  power. 
They  have  only  recently  realized  that  shackles  have  been  upon  his  limbs,  and 
that  he  is  powerless  to  aid  the  cause  which  he  so  brilliantly  advocated.  What 
arguments  can  we  use  to  abate  England's  purpose?  That  the  amount  of 
gold  in  the  world  is  too  limited  for  the  world's  business?  Her  answer  is  that 
her  people  own  almost  all  the  gold  in  the  world;  that  they  have  enough  and 
a  plethora,  and  out  of  their  abundance  loan  it  to  other  nations  on  bonds  and 
mortgages.  Will  you  say  that  gold  appreciates,  and  that  products  have  dimin- 
ished in  value?  Her  answer  will  be  that  she  desires  its  appreciation.  Will  you 
say  that  the  appreciation  of  gold  has  stimulated  the  production  of  silver- 
standard  countries,  and  that  their  competition  has  lowered  the  gold  price  of  al] 
farm  products?  Her  answer  will  be  that  she  raises  but  little  of  these-  that  she 
buys,  and  that  the  cheaper  she  buys  the  better. 

Should  we  point  to  the  land-owning  class  in  England,  the  burdens  of 
which  have  become  almost  intolerable,  her  answer  will  be  that  some  interests 
must  sufTer  in  pursuing  a  great  national  policy,  and  that  the  English  govern- 
ment will  stand  as  heretofore,  for  the  interests  of  the  governing  class  of  the 
country,  the  class  which  subordinates  every  subject  of  domestic  and  economic 
policy  to  the  desire  of  maintaining  a  constantly  increasing  control  over  the 
products  of  labor  throughout  the  world  by  a  system  which  makes  her  a  con- 
trolling power  in  peace  and  war;  a  partner  without  risk  in  all  enterprises,  and 
the  absorber  of  the  profits  of  world-wide  production. 

To  this  policy  of  enlightened  selfishness  no  man  who  knows  the  controlling 
motives  of  both  nations  and  individuals  can  oppose  rational  objections.  We  do 
not  object  to  English  policy  on  English  sod.  We  object  to  an  English  policy 
on  American  soil. 

England's  wealth  consists  of  gold;  our  wealth  consists  of  property  and 
products.  England  is  a  creditor  nation;  the  United  States  is  a  debtor  nation. 
England  is  interested  in  having  money  dear  and  products  cheap.  We  rely  on 
good  prices  for  our  products  in  order  to  pay  our  foreign  debts.  England  pro- 
poses to  pursue  a  policy  which  will  increase  the  value  of  the  gold  that  she 
owns.  Ought  not  we  to  pursue  a  policy  which  will  increase  the  value  of  the 
property  we  own  and  of  the  products  which  we  export?  Do  the  imitators  of 
the  English  policy  in  this  country  realize  that  there  is  a  diflference  in  interest 
between  the  buyer  and  the  seller,  between  the  creditor  nation  and  the  debtor 


242  THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

or  producing  nation?  What  should  be  our  policy?  Why,  to  increase  the  use 
of  silver  and  in  that  way  increase  its  values  so  as  to  restore  its  old  parity  with 
gold. 

We  find  that  the  dislocation  between  gold  and  silver  has  given  the  advan- 
tage in  production  to  countries  that  are  not  on  the  gold  basis;  that  their  farm 
products  (whose  prices  are  stable  in  silver  although  reduced  in  gold),  are  com- 
peting with  ours  in  foreign  markets  to  our  own  disadvantage,  and  that  their 
manufactured  products,  produced  at  a  labor  cost  stable  in  silver,  but  reduced  in 
gold,  offer  a  menace  in  the  future  to  our  home  manufactures,  protected  though 
they  be  by  tariff  laws.  We  have  at  stake  the  interests  of  the  great  debtor 
nation  of  the  world;  of  a  nation  yielding  the  greatest  amount  of  farm  products 
in  the  world — farm  products  on  which  we  rely  for  the  payment  of  our  foreign 
debts  and  the  prices  of  which  have  been  driven  down  in  gold  as  silver  has 
fallen. 

The  Republican  party  proposes  to  confine  our  bimetallic  negotiation  to  but 
three  countries — England,  France  and  Germany — whose  interests  as  gold  own- 
ing and  creditor  nations  are  directly  opposed  to  our  interests,  while  it  ignores 
the  numerous  debtor  and  producing  nations  with  which  an  effective  alliance 
might  be  made  for  the  increase  of  the  use  of  silver. 

Where  is  the  gold  of  the  world?  Refer  to  the  Mint  Director's  report  and 
you  will  find  that  of  the  four  thousand  million  dollars  of  gold  in  the  world,  all 
of  which,  if  melted  would  occupy  a  cube  of  only  twenty-two  feet,  one-half  is 
actually  located  in  England,  Germany  and  France.  Look  at  the  registered  list 
of  bonds  and  mortgages  and  you  will  find  that  the  other  half  though  scattered 
in  other  countries,  is  tied  by  the  string  of  bond  or  mortgage  to  those  three 
creditor  countries  so  that  it  may  be  drawn  away  at  any  time  from  debtor  coun- 
tries, thus  prostrating  their  business  and  imperiling  their  finances.  So  that 
instead  of  devoting  their  time  to  uninterrupted  productions  of  wealth,  their 
energies  are  wasted  trying  to  catch  gold  on  the  fly.  Think  of  it!  One-half 
of  the  gold  of  the  world  actually  needed  for  the  local  business  of  those  three 
countries,  hardly  discernible  in  the  vast  area  of  the  earth's  surface,  and  yet  our 
monometallic  friends  tell  us  that  the  other  half  is  sufficient  for  the  business  of 
the  rest  of  the  world,  occupying  a  vast  area  of  country  and  having  a  population 
twelve  times  as  great  as  that  of  the  three  combined. 

All  agree  that  the  competitive  use  of  silver  in  the  world's  exchanges  should 
be  restored.  The  Republican  party  proposes  that  we  shall  limit  our  negotia- 
tions only  to  the  beneficiaries  of  the  gold  monopoly  and  that  we  shall  not  apply 
to  the  victims  of  that  monopoly  for  assistance  or  aid.  Was  monopoly  ever 
beaten  down  by  such  methods? 

Was  monopoly  ever  impaired  by  persuasion  addressed  to  the  monopolist? 
In  transportation  the  victims  of  monopoly  resort  to  a  competitive  road.  In  the 
public  lighting  the  victims  resort  to  a  competitive  gas  or  electric  light  com- 
pany; but  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Republican  party  the  victims  of  the 
gold  monopoly  who  so  greatly  outnumber  the  beneficiaries  of  that  monopoly 
are  not  invited  to  join  the  ground  for  common  defense  and  protection,  but  in 
place  of  that  the  United  States,  the  victim  suffering  most  of  all,  stretches  out 
the  hands  of  diplomatic  persuasion  to  the  countries  whose  monopoly  it  seeks 
to  break  down.    ' 


THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION.  243 

Had  the  Republican  party  proposed  in  its  platform — instead  of  confining  its 
negotiations  only  to  three  countries  that  have  a  plethora  of  metallic  money — to 
call  a  conference  of  the  debtor  and  producing  nations  of  the  world  whose  stocks 
of  metallic  money  (both  gold  and  silver)  are  smaH  and  which  have  been  com- 
pelled to  issue  large  amounts  of  depreciated  paper  money  because  of  the  scarcity 
of  metallic  money,  we  would  then  have  a  contemplated  arrangement  with  coun- 
tries whose  absorbing  capacity  for  silver  would  be  great.  The  first  step,  how- 
ever, toward  such  a  union  is  the  courageous  action  of  this  country.  Let  that 
action  be  taken  and  we  will  have  the  intelligent  co-operation  of  Russia,  Austria 
and  other  European  nations  that  have  made  ineffectual  attempts  by  the  accu- 
mulation of  gold  to  provide  for  gold  redemption,  all  of  whom  know  that  their 
accumulated  gold  would  slip  out  of  their  boundaries  like  water  out  of  a  sieve 
if  gold  redemption  were  attempted.  For  it  is  a  singular  fact  that  there  is  not  a 
debtor  country  in  the  world  that  has  been  able  to  maintain  gold  payments  of  its 
paper  money,  except  our  own,  and  we  accomplish  it  only  with  bond  issue, 
which  in  reality  constitutes  the  premium  paid  for  gold. 

But  enough  of  international  conference.  It  has  simply  been  used  as  a  club 
to  beat  down  national  action  on  the  silver  question.  Are  we  not,  gentlemen, 
exaggerating  the  difficulties  of  the  task  before  us?  Remember  that  in  order 
to  restore  silver  it  is  only  necessary  to  absorb  the  current  product  of  the  mines. 
The  accumulated  stock  is  in  the  shape  of  coin  bearing  the  stamp  of  various  gov- 
ernments, and  it  is  absurd  to  assume  that  the  owners  of  such  coin  will  send 
it  here  simply  to  receive  the  American  stamp.  Silver  coin  it  is  and  silver  coin 
it  would  remain.  There  is  no  surplus  anywhere  in  the  shape  of  bullion,  for  the 
bullion  in  the  Treasury  vaults  is  constructively  coined  and  is  represented  by 
silver  certificates  and  Treasury  notes  now  in  circulation. 

The  current  product  of  the  mines  is  now  all  absorbed  in  current  uses — in 
the  arts,  in  coinage  and  for  other  purposes.  Any  demand  that  we  create  would 
be  a  new  demand,  and  would  have  a  tendency  to  increase  the  value  of  the  cur- 
rent product.  But  we  are  told  that  increase  of  value  will  increase  production. 
Of  course,  no  man  can  foretell  what  the  production  of  silver  will  be,  but  the 
best  test  of  the  limitation  of  the  future  is  the  limitation  of  the  past,  and  we  all 
know  that  all  the  silver  coined  in  the  world — the  result  of  operation  of  silver 
mining  for  ages — can  be  put  into  a  cube  of  sixty-six  feet.  The  world  has  never 
produced  enough  of  metallic  money.  The  fact  that  today  over  one-fourth  of 
the  money  of  the  world  is  uncovered  paper  money  proves  this. 

Now,  what  increased  use  can  you  suggest  for  silver  in  this  country  that  will 
increase  the  value  of  the  product  of  the  mines?  Our  per  capita  circulation  is 
currently  stated  to  be  $22  to  $25.  Our  population  is  increasing  at  the  rate 
of  over  two  millions  a  year.  It  would  take  between  $50,000,000  and  $60,000,000 
a  year  to  maintain  the  present  per  capita  so  long  as  the  population  increases  at 
that  rate.  But  is  a  per  capita  circulation  of  $25  sufficient?  Such  a  per  capita 
circulation  might  be  sufficient  for  a  credit  nation  like  England,  whose  area 
is  limited,  whose  population  is  dense,  whose  exchanges  are  easy  and  whose 
ability  to  increase  her  coin  reserves  is  made  easy  by  the  great  debts  owing  to 
her  people.  But  certainly  it  is  not  sufficient  in  a  vast  debtor  country  like  this, 
with  its  immense  area,  its  scattered  population  and  its  limited  methods  of 
exchange.  If  we  should  increase  our  per  capita  to  $30  we  would  have  to  coin 
$70;000,ooo  a  year  for  five  years. 


244  THB  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

Besides,  our  national  bank  circulation  has  been  gradually  contracting  and 
is  bound  to  be  withdrawn  altogether  when  the  balance  of  trade  is  restored  in 
our  favor  by  good  prices  for  our  products  and  the  surplus  of  revenue  is  applied 
to  the  national  debt.  It  will  take  $40,000,000  a  year  for  five  years  to  take  the 
place  of  the  national  bank  notes,  so  that  we  have  here  an  increased  demand 
for  silver  of  nearly  $200,000,000  in  this  country,  without  any  inflation  or  expan- 
sion beyond  a  per  capita  of  $30.  This  demand  is  equal  to  the  entire  cur- 
rent product  of  the  mines,  which  is  already  exhausted  in  current  use.  Can 
any  man  say  that  a  new  demand  of  such  magnitude  shall  not  restore  the  old  par- 
ity? And  if  the  old  parity  is  restored,  will  not  this  talk  about  so-cent  dollars 
and  a  debased  currency  entirely  cease?  The  gold  monometallists  propose  to 
maintain  this  parity  by  the  redemption  of  silver  in  gold.  We  propose  the 
rightful  method  of  restoring  parity  by  increasing  the  use  and  consequently 
increasing  the  value  of  silver,  and  by  restoring  the  time-honored  use  as  money 
of  redemption  equally  with  gold. 

But  suppose  the  fears  of  our  alarmist  friends  are  realized,  and  that  nature 
instead  of  exposing  her  silver  treasury  as  she  has  done  in  the  past,  gradually 
and  progressively  to  meet  the  wants  of  the  world  for  money,  should  expose  it 
in  large  abundance,  is  not  this  a  matter  of  easy  control?  Recollect  that  silver 
mines  already  existing  will  soon  be  exhausted.  The  Comstock  lode  in  my  own 
State,  which  alarmed  all  Europe,  is  now  reduced  in  its  production  to  $500,000 
per  annum.  The  mines  of  the  future  are  in  the  ungranted  mineral  lands  of 
this  country  and  Mexico,  for  remember  that  Mexico  and  the  United  States 
produce  two-thirds  of  the  silver  of  the  world.  Will  it  not  be  easy  to  limit  those 
grants,  either  by  exacting  royalty  or  by  total  withdrawal,  so  that  the  silver 
stores  of  the  future  may  not  be  unduly  drawn  upon  for  the  present,  and  that  the 
calm  and  equal  production  of  silver  commensurate  with  its  use  may  be  estab- 
lished and  secured? 

For  three  years  you  have  been  on  the  gold  standard.  Do  you  like  it? 
For  twenty-three  years  you  have  waited  for  international  action.  Can  you 
wait  longer,  and  who  are  to  take  the  lead  in  this  reform — the  benePciaries  of  the 
gold  monopoly  or  its  victims?  And  who  are  the  victims?  Look  on  the  map 
of  your  country  and  mark  the  area  of  distress  as  indicated  by  the  railroads  that 
have  been  placed  in  the  hands  of  receivers  since  1893,  comprising  nearly  one- 
third  of  the  entire  mileage  of  the  country.  You  will  find  it  in  the  mining  belt, 
comprising  six  States  and  three  Territories,  whose  basis  of  industry,  with  which 
all  their  industries,  agricultural,  commercial,  railroad  and  banking  were  core- 
lated,  is  suffering  from  the  decline  of  silver.  Mark  the  wheat  belt  of  the  North- 
west and  the  cotton  belt  of  the  South  and  you  will  find  that  in  those  areas 
devoted  to  mining,  to  wheat-raising  and  cotton-growing  more  than  one-half 
of  the  local  railroad  mileage  has  gone  into  the  hands  of  receivers  since  1893. 

Low  price  products  will  not  stand  high  rates.  Producers  who  produce  at 
a  loss  cannot  buy  goods  that  require  transportation,  and  so  the  railroads  have 
suffered  in  the  transportation  of  the  products  of  the  region  through  which  they 
pass  and  of  the  goods  which  they  return  to  the  producers  in  exchange.  The 
gradual  fall  in  the  price  of  silver  has  for  twenty  years  seriously  affected  the 
Western  and  Southern  States,  as  their  products  have  been  compelled  to  com- 
pete with  the  product  of  silver-standard  countries,  the  prices  of  which,  stable 


y)(x){vU^v^\>Kx;s 


TH-B  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION.  247 

in  silver,  have  gradually  gone  down  in  gold  until  their  price  is  now  one-half  of 
what  it  used  to  be. 

It  is  true  that  the  New  England  and  Middle  States  suffered  but  little  until 
1893,  and  then  largely  because  of  diminished  markets  in  the  South  and  West 
and  loss  from  their  railroad  securities  and  other  interests  in  the  South  and  West. 
They  suffered  the  least  because  they  were  creditor  States  whose  margin  of  secu- 
rity did  not  disappear  until  1893,  and  also  because  they  were  manufacturing 
States  whose  industries  were  protected  against  cheap  European  labor,  thus 
enabling  them  to  monopolize  the  home  market.  They  have  not  yet  suffered 
from  Oriental  competition,  for  the  manufactured  production  of  those  countries, 
stimulated  by  the  margin  of  security,  did  not  disappear  until  1893.  They  have 
not  yet  suffered  from  Oriental  competition,  for  the  manufactured  production 
of  those  countries,  stimulated  by  the  appreciation  of  gold,  has  thus  far  met 
only  the  requirements  of  the  local  markets,  although  it  has  seriously  affected 
English  and  German  manufacturers  who  used  to  supply  such  markets;  but  the 
Eastern  States  will  soon  suffer  from  Oriental  competition.  Japanese  produc- 
tion is  looking  out  for  American  markets,  for  their  products  will  naturally 
seek  a  country  whose  labor  cost  is  the  highest.  No  tariff  short  of  absolute 
exclusion  will  protect  the  Eastern  States  against  this  invasion,  and  exclusion 
is  impossible,  for  the  Western  and  Southern  States  will  not  consent  to  a  policy 
which  surrenders  their  products  to  the  competition  of  silver-standard  countries. 
It  is  evident  that,  with  a  view  to  protect  the  products  of  this  country,  whether 
from  the  farm  or  the  factory,  against  the  products  of  silver-standard  countries, 
our  policy  should  be,  by  increasing  the  use  of  silver,  to  pull  up  its  value  and 
thus,  by  the  use  of  a  competitive  metal,  to  pull  down  the  value  of  gold.  By 
doing  this  we  will  take  away  at  least  half  of  the  efficiency  of  the  competing 
labor  of  silver-standard  countries. 

We  therefore  claim  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i 
by  this  country  is  practicable;  that  it  will  restore  the  old  relative  value  of  silver 
and  gold,  release  this  country  from  dependence  upon  foreign  gold,  impair  the 
competitive  efficiency  of  the  cheap  labor  of  silver-standard  countries,  restore 
the  value  of  our  agricultural  products  with  which  we  pay  our  debts  abroad 
and  save  this  country  from  a  manufacturing  competition  that  will  prove  destruct- 
ive. This  question  has  not  been  fought  out  in  the  manufacturing  States  of  the 
country  as  it  has  been  in  the  mining  camps,  but  the  manufacturers  of  this  coun- 
try before  the  end  of  this  campaign  will  learn  that  their  interests  are  in  com- 
mon with  those  of  the  general  producers  of  the  country,  and  the  Oriental  com- 
petition which  has  been  so  destructive  to  the  farmers  will,  in  the  end,  be 
destructive  to  the  manufacturers. 

We  hope  to  see  the  wheat  interests  and  the  mining  interests,  the  cotton 
interests  and  the  manufacturing  interests  united  against  the  opponents  of  bimet- 
allism. For  recollect  that  it  is  the  dealers  in  money,  the  dealers  in  products 
and  the  carriers  of  the  products  that  have  made  a  union  against  the  productive 
energies  of  the  country,  whether  those  productive  energies  are  displayed  in  cot- 
ton and  wool  manufactures  in  the  New  England  and  Middle  States,  the  iron  and 
coal  industries  in  Pennsylvania  and  the  cotton  industries  of  the  South,  or  in  the 
mining  of  silver  in  the  great  West;  and  we  may  rest  assured  that  this  country 
will  in  time  pursue  a  policy  of  enlightened  self-interest.  It  will  realize  it  is  to 
14 


248  THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

its  interest  as  a  producer  of  over  one-third  of  the  entire  silver  of  the  world, 
as  the  greatest  debtor  nation  of  the  world,  as  the  greatest  producing  nation  in 
the  world,  to  stop  the  appreciation  of  gold,  to  stop  the  increase  in  value  of 
every  unit  of  this  four  thousand  millions  in  gold,  whose  present  home  is  in  three 
foreign  countries.  And  with  the  change  will  come  beneficent  results  not  only 
to  producers,  but  to  the  banking,  mercantile  and  railroad  interests,  which  are 
now  so  steadily  opposing  us.  They  will  realize  that  their  prosperity  is  based 
upon  the  general  prosperity  of  the  entire  country,  and  that  the  prosperity  of 
this  country  cannot  continue  so  long  as  debtor  and  producing  nations  recognize 
gold  as  the  only  money  metal,  and  by  their  action  build  up  its  value  and  increase 
its  control  over  the  products  of  labor. 

This  campaign  is  to  open  up  an  era  of  education,  and  into  this  work  the 
silver  party  enters  animated  by  no  sectional  spirit,  controlled  by  no  feeling 
of  envy  against  the  more  prosperous,  but  inspired  by  the  desire  to  maintain 
a  broad  American  policy  which  shall  protect  the  interests  of  American  produc- 
tion whether  in  the  mining  camps  of  the  mountains,  the  wheat  fields  of  the 
West,  the  cotton  fields  of  the  South,  or  the  factories  of  New  England.  But 
let  us  remember  always  in  this  contest  that  union  is  strength,  and  that  the 
motto  of  our  opponents  is  now  as  it  has  always  been,  "Divide  and  conquer." 

For  permanent  chairman  the  convention  selected  William  P.  St. 
John,  Esq.,  of  New  York.  Mr.  St.  John,  until  recently  connected  with 
one  of  the  large  banks  of  New  York  City,  has  been  a  most  earnest 
advocate  of  free  coinage  and,  in  spite  of  the  local  opposition  which  he 
has  encountered,  has  defended  bimetallism  with  great  courage  and 
ability.  He  at  last,  in  a  business  way,  suflfered  martyrdom  for  his  con- 
victions, relinquishing  a  large  salary  as  president  of  the  bank  rather 
than  keep  silent  upon  a  matter  which  he  believed  to  be  of  vital  im- 
portance to  the  country.  I  give  below  the  speech  which  he  delivered 
upon  taking  the  chair : 

Mr.  St.  JoWs  Speech. 

Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  The  skill  and  efficiency  of  your  labors  in 
the  past  have  been  rewarded  by  the  adoption  of  your  demand  for  legislation 
by  two  great  organizations  of  the  people,  namely:  The  Democracy  and  the 
People's  party.  If  now  you  are  able  to  induce  a  coalition  of  these  two  organi- 
zations for  the  one  purpose,  the  desired  achievement  on  behalf  of  the  people  will 
ensue. 

Assuming  then  that  you  will  prevail  upon  those  patriots  calling  themselves 
the  People's  party  to  endorse  the  nomination  of  Bryan  and  Sewall,  it  is 
advisable  to  warrant  the  desirability  of  the  end  in  view. 

It  is  among  the  first  principles  in  finance  that  the  value  of  each  dollar, 
expressed  in  prices,  depends  upon  the  total  number  of  dollars  in  circulation. 
The  plane  of  prices  is  high  when  the  number  of  dollars  in  circulation  is  great 
in  proportion  to  the  number  of  things  to  be  exchanged  by  means  of  dollars, 
and  low  when  the  dollars  are  proportionately  few.  The  plane  of  prices  at 
present  and  for  some  time  past  is  and  has  been  ruinously  low.    The  increase 


THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION.  249 

of  our  population  at  about  two  millions  a  year,  scattered  over  our  immense 
territory,  calls  for  increasing  exchanges,  and  thereby  demands  an  increasing 
number  of  dollars  in  circulation.  The  increase  in  the  number  of  dollars  when 
dollars  are  confined  to  gold  is  not  sufficiently  rapid  to  meet  the  growth  of 
our  exchanges.  The  consequence  is  a  growing  value  of  dollars,  or  a  diminish- 
ing value  of  everything  else  expressed  in  dollars;  which  is  to  say  a  tendency 
toward  constantly  declining  prices. 

The  fountain  head  of  our  prosperity  has  run  dry.  Our  farmers  all  over 
the  country  have  endured  the  depression  in  prices,  until  they  get  about  $8  or 
$9  an  acre  for  an  expenditure  of  $io  per  acre,  and  the  like.  Their  credit  is 
exhausted  at  their  country  stores.  The  country  store  ceases  to  order  from  the 
city  merchant,  the  city  merchant  reduces  his  demand  upon  the  manufacturer. 
Manufactures  are  curtailed.  The  consequence  is  that  employes  and  all  elements 
of  labor  are  being  discharged,  and  wages  are  lowered  to  those  who  continue 
in  employment.  The  sufferings  of  the  farmers,  who  constitute  nearly  one-half 
our  population,  are  thus  enforced  upon  the  city  merchant,  the  manufacturer  and 
all  forms  of  labor.  These  combined  elements  constitute  the  overwhelming 
majority  of  voters.  Their  intelligent  conclusion  will  be  felt  when  expressed 
at  the  polls. 

The  banker  also  is  without  prosperity  unless  prosperity  is  general  through- 
out the  United  States.  He  must  learn  to  distinguish  between  cheap  money  and 
money  commanding  a  low  rate  of  interest.  The  dollar  worth  two  bushels  of 
wheat  is  a  dear  dollar,  and  yet  it  commands  interest  in  Wall  street  at  present 
of  but  two  per  cent,  per  annum  on  call.  If  the  dollar  can  be  cheapened  by 
increasing  the  number  of  dollars,  so  that  each  dollar  will  buy  less  wheat,  the 
increasing  prices  of  wheat  will  increase  the  demand  for  dollars  to  invest 
in  its  production.  Then  the  borrower  of  dollars  to  invest  in  the  pro- 
duction of  wheat,  being  reasonably  sure  of  a  profit  from  that  employ- 
ment of  the  money,  can  afford  to  pay  interest  for  its  use  as  a  part  of 
his  profit.  In  other  words,  interest  is  a  share  of  the  profit  on  the  em- 
ployment of  money.  So  that  abundant  money,  money  readily  obtainable,  which 
is  to  say  really  cheap  money,  is  the  money  which  commands  a  high  rate  of 
interest,  as  a  share  of  the  profit  of  the  borrower  in  using  it. 

As  we  appeal  to  the  country,  in  the  justice  of  our  cause,  one  or  two 
points  of  common  inquiry  must  be  satisfied,  as  follows: 

The  experience  of  Mexico  is  held  up  for  our  alarm.  We  answer,  first,  that 
Mexico  is  conspicuously  prosperous  at  home.  Her  increase  in  manufactures, 
railway  earnings  and  the  like  in  recent  years  is  phenomenal.  Second,  Mexico 
is  no  criterion  for  the  United  States,  for  the  reason  that  she  has  a  foreign  trade 
indebtedness  of  about  $20,000,000  annually  in  excess  of  the  value  of  her  ex- 
ports of  cotton,  sugar,  coffee,  hides  and  the  like,  which  must  be  paid  for  in 
the  surplus  product  of  her  mines.  Her  silver,  therefore,  goes  abroad  as 
merchandise  and  at  a  valuation  fixed  by  the  outside  world.  The  United  States, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  a  nation  of  seventy  millions  of  people,  scattered  over  a 
territory  seventeen  times  the  area  of  France.  A  single  one  of  our  railway 
systems,  the  Erie,  exceeds  the  aggregate  railway  mileage  of  all  Mexico.  We 
spare  silver  will  furnish  us.  Hence,  our  silver  money,  at  home  and  abroad,  will 
oflFer  an  employment  for  money  to  an  aggregate  greater  than  the  world's 
be  valued  as  the  money  of  the  United  States. 


250  THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

The  opposition  threatens  us  with  a  flood  of  Europe's  silver  upon  otif 
reopened  mints.  We  answer,  Europe  has  no  silver  but  her  silver  money.  Her 
silver  money  values  silver  at  from  three  cents  to  seven  cents  on  the  dollar 
higher  than  ours.  Hence  the  European  merchant  or  banker  must  sacrifice 
from  three  to  seven  per  cent,  of  his  full  legal  tender  money  in  order  to 
recoin  it  at  our  mints.  Europe's  silverware,  like  America's  silverware,  carries 
in  it  the  additional  value  of  labor  and  the  manufacturer's  profit. 

They  threaten  us  with  a  flood  of  silver  from  the  far  East.  We  answer  that 
the  course  of  silver  is  invariably  eastward  and  never  toward  the  west.  British 
India  is  a  perpetual  sink  of  silver,  absorbing  it,  never  to  return,  by  from 
thirty  to  sixty  million  dollars'  worth  every  year.  And  India's  absorption  of 
silver  will  be  enlarged  by  the  steadiness  of  price  for  silver  fixed  by  our  reopened 
mints. 

They  threaten  us  with  a  "sudden  retirement  of  $600,000,000  gold  with  the 
accompanying  panic,  causing  contraction  and  commercial  disaster  unparalleled." 
We  answer  that  our  total  stock  of  gold,  other  than  about  $10,000,000  or  $15,000,- 
000  circulating  on  the  Pacific  Coast,  is  already  in  retirement.  Practically  all 
our  gold  is  in  the  United  States  Treasury  or  held  by  banks.  The  gold  in  the 
Treasury  will  remain  there,  if  the  Secretary  avails  of  his  option  to  redeem 
United  States  notes  in  silver.  The  gold  in  the  banks  constitutes  the  quiet  and 
undisturbed  portion  of  their  reserves  against  their  liabilities.  It  will  continue 
to  do  money  duty  as  such  reserves  after  free  coinage  for  silver  is  enacted. 
Hence  a  premium  on  it  will  not  contract  the  currency.  The  utmost  possible 
contraction  of  the  currency  will  be  the  few  millions  circulating  on  the  Pacific 
Coast,  and  this  will  be  retired  but  slowly. 

A  similar  threat  of  a  flight  of  gold  was  made  for  the  Bland  Act  of  1878. 
President  Hayes  was  urged  to  veto  it,  but  Congress  passed  it  over  the  veto. 
Instead  of  a  flight  of  gold  as  had  been  predicted,  we  gained  by  importation 
$4,000,000  the  first  year,  $70,000,000  the  next  and  $90,000,000  the  third  year. 
During  the  twelve  years  that  the  Act  was  on  the  statute  book  we  gained 
$221,000,000  of  foreign  gold.  Instead  of  the  destruction  of  our  credit  abroad, 
as  had  been  predicted,  the  United  States  four  per  cent,  loan,  which  stood  at  loi 
on  the  day  of  enactment,  sold  at  120  per  cent,  within  three  years,  and  at  130 
per  cent,  subsequently.  Instead  of  defeating  the  resumption  of  specie  pay- 
ments on  January  first  of  the  following  year,  the  24,000,000  silver  dollars  which 
were  coined  in  1878  and  circulated  by  means  of  the  silver  certificates,  reduced  the 
demand  upon  the  Government  for  gold.  Hence  the  threat  of  disaster  now  is 
without  historic  foundation. 

This,  then,  is  what  will  follow  the  reopening  of  our  mints  to  silver:  The 
gold  already  in  the  Treasury  will  remain  there,  if  common  sense  dictates  the 
Treasury  management,  that  is  if  the  Treasury  exercises  its  option  to  redeem 
United  States  notes  in  silver.  A  premium  on  gold  will  not  occasion  a  con- 
traction of  the  currency,  bank  hoards  of  gold  continuing  to  serve  as  a  portion 
of  bank  reserves  against  their  liabilities.  A  premium  on  gold  will  tend  to  in- 
crease our  exports  by  causing  a  higher  rate  of  foreign  ex-change,  that  is  to 
say  by  yielding  a  larger  net  return  in  dollars  on  the  sale  of  bills  of  exchange 
drawn  against  goods  exported.  Such  premium  will  tend  to  diminish  our  imports 
by  increasing  the  cost  of  bills  of  exchange  with  which  to  pay  for  goods 
imported. 


THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION.  251 

The  tendency  of  increasing  our  exports  and  decreasing  our  imports  will 
be,  first,  to  set  our  spindles  running,  swell  the  number  of  paid  operatives, 
increase  their  wages,  thereby  adding  to  the  number  and  paying  capacity  of 
consumers,  and  thus  enlarge  our  home  market  for  all  home  products  and 
manufactures,  with  prosperity  in  general  as  the  result  assured. 

The  tendency  of  increasing  our  exports  and  decreasing  our  imports  will 
be,  second,  to  establish  a  credit  balance  of  trade  for  the  United  States.  A 
credit  balance  of  trade  means  that  Europe  has  become  our  debtor  and  must 
settle  with  us  in  money.  Europe's  silver  money  is  overvalued  in  her  gold, 
compared  with  ours,  by  from  three  to  seven  cents  on  the  dollar.  The  European 
merchant  or  banker  will  therefore  make  his  trade  settlements  with  us  in  gold 
more  profitably  by  from  three  to  seven  per  cent,  than  in  his  silver.  With  the 
instant  that  European  trade  settlements  with  the  United  States  are  made  in 
gold,  parity  for  our  gold  and  silver  money  is  established  in  the  markets  of 
the  world. 

Therewith,  the  371.25  grains  of  pure  silver  in  our  silver  dollar  and  the  23.22 
grains  of  gold  in  our  gold  dollar  become  of  exactly  equal  worth,  as  bullion, 
in  New  York. 

Free  and  unlimited  coinage  for  silver  in  the  United  States  together  with 
the  present  free  and  unlimited  coinage  for  gold,  will,  thus,  provide  us  an  in- 
creasing aggregate  of  money.  The  increasing  number  of  dollars  cheapening  the 
dollar,  along  with  the  increasing  quantity  of  commodities  cheapening  the  com- 
modities, will  tend  to  maintain  prices  when  the  commodities  are  in  fair  abun- 
dance Producers  obtaining  then  more  dollars  the  more  abundant  their 
products,  will  be  remunerated  in  some  fair  proportion  to  their  toil.  Our 
producers  will  be  thus  assured  their  fair  share  of  the  real  wealth  which  they 
produce.  This  will  tend  to  the  better  distribution  and  dissemination  of 
wealth  as  against  the  present  pernicious  tendency  to  aggregate  wealth  in  a 
few  hands. 

After  the  permanent  organization  had  been  completed  a  committee 
was  appointed  to  confer  with  the  Populist  Convention,  then  in  session 
in  the  same  city. 

On  the  second  day  of  the  convention  little  was  done  in  the  transac- 
tion of  business,  the  convention  being  disposed  to  wait  to  consult 
further  with  the  Populists.  During  the  day  a  speech  was  delivered  by 
Congressman  Charles  A.  Towne,  of  Minnesota.  Mr.  Towne  gained 
a  national  reputation  through  a  speech  which  he  delivered  in  the  House 
of  Representatives  on  the  8th  day  of  February,  1896.  The  speech  was 
very  widely  circulated  immediately  after  its  delivery  and  still  more 
extensively  during  the  campaign.  It  treated  with  great  force  and 
clearness  the  subject  of  falling  prices.  The  contest  for  perma- 
nent chairman  of  the  Silver  Convention  lay  between  him  and  Mr.  St, 
John,  and  when  the  latter  was  chosen  the  former  was  made  permanent 
vice-chairman.  Mr.  Towne  was  present  at  the  Republican  National 
Convention,  though  not  a  delegate,  and  constantly  conferred  with  the 


252  THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

silver  Republicans.  Throughout  the  campaign  his  services  were  in  con- 
stant demand  and  his  time  wholly  devoted  to  the  success  of  bimetallism. 

In  addition  to  the  speech  of  Mr.  Towne,  addresses  were  made  by 
Judge  Joseph  Sheldon  of  Connecticut,  a  pioneer  in  the  silver  cause; 
Mrs.  Helen  M,  Cougar  of  Indiana,  who  rendered  most  efficient 
service  during  the  entire  campaign,  and  ex-Covernor  John  P.  St.  John 
of  Kansas,  also  an  able  champion  of  bimetallism. 

At  the  afternoon  session  on  Thursday  a  poll  was  taken  to  determme 
the  former  party  affiliations  of  the  delegates  present,  and  the  result 
showed  526  who  had  been  Republicans,  146  who  had  been  Democrats, 
49  who  had  been  Populists,  9  who  had  been  Prohibitionists,  9  who  had 
been  Independent,  i  who  had  been  a  Nationalist,  and  i  who  had  been 
a  Creenbacker. 

On  Friday  Senator  Stewart,  of  Nevada,  was  called  for  and  delivered 
a  speech  in  which  he  described  the  Chicago  Convention  as  he  witnessed 
it.  A  poll  was  taken  to  ascertain  how  many  had  seen  military  service, 
and  it  was  learned  that  196  had  served  in  the  Union  army  during  the 
late  war,  49  in  the  Confederate  army,  and  4  in  the  Mexican  war. 

Senator  John  P.  Jones,  of  Nevada,  chairman  of  the  committee  on 

Resolutions,  presented  the  following  platform,  which  was  adopted  by 

unanimous  vote. 

Silver  Party  Platform. 

The  National  Silver  party,  in  convention  assembled,  hereby  adopts  the  fol- 
lowing declaration  of  principles: 

The  paramount  issue  at  this  time  in  the  United  States  is  indisputably  the 
money  question.  It  is  between  the  gold  standard,  gold  bonds  and  bank  cur- 
rency on  the  one  side,  and  the  bimetallic  standard,  no  bonds  and  government 
currency  on  the  other.  On  this  issue  we  declare  ourselves  to  be  in  favor  of  a 
distinctly  American  financial  system.  We  are  unalterably  opposed  to  the  single 
gold  standard  and  demand  the  immediate  return  to  the  constitutional  stand- 
ard of  gold  and  silver  by  the  restoration  by  this  Government,  independently  of 
any  foreign  power,  of  the  unrestricted  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  into 
standard  money,  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i,  and  upon  terms  of  exact  equality,  as 
they  existed  prior  to  1873;  the  silver  coin  to  be  a  full  legal  tender  equally  with 
gold  for  all  debts  and  dues,  public  and  private,  and  we  favor  such  legislation 
as  will  prevent  for  the  future  the  demonetization  of  any  kind  of  legal  tender 
money  by  private  contract. 

We  hold  that  the  power  to  control  and  regulate  a  paper  currency  is  insep- 
arable from  the  power  to  coin  money,  and  hence  that  all  currency  intended  to 
circulate  as  money  should  be  issued  and  its  volume  controlled  by  the  general 
Government  only,  and  should  be  legal  tender. 

We  are  unalterably  opposed  to  the  issue  by  the  United  States  of  interest- 
bearing  bonds  in  time  of  peace,  and  we  denounce  as  a  blunder  worse  than  a 
crime  the  present  Treasury  policy,  concurred  in  by  a  Republican  house,   of 


THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION.  253 

plunging  the  country  into  debt  by  hundreds  of  millions  in  the  vain  attempt 
to  maintain  the  gold  standard  by  borrowing  gold;  and  we  demand  the  pay- 
ment of  all  coin  obligations  of  the  United  States,  as  provided  by  existing  laws, 
in  either  gold  or  silver  coin,  at  the  option  of  the  Government,  and  not  at  the 
option  of  the  creditor. 

The  demonetization  of  silver  in  1873  enormously  increased  the  demand 
for  gold,  enhancing  its  purchasing  power  and  lowering  all  prices  measured 
by  that  standard,  and  since  that  unjust  and  indefensible  act  the  prices  of  Amer- 
ican products  have  fallen  upon  an  average  nearly  fifty  per  cent.,  carrying  down 
with  them  proportionately  the  money  value  of  all  other  forms  of  property. 
Such  fall  of  prices  has  destroyed  the  profits  of  legitimate  industry,  injuring 
the  producer  for  the  benefit  of  the  non-producer,  increasing  the  burden  of  the 
debtor,  swelling  the  gains  of  the  creditor,  paralyzing  the  productive  energies 
of  the  American  people,  relegating  to  idleness  vast  numbers  of  wil'.ing  work- 
ers, sending  the  shadows  of  despair  into  the  home  of  the  honest  toiler,  filling 
the  land  with  tramps  and  paupers  and  building  up  colossal  fortunes  at  the 
money  centers. 

In  the  effort  to  maintain  the  gold  standard  the  country  has  within  the  past 
two  years,  in  a  time  of  profound  peace  and  plenty,  been  loaded  down  with 
$262,000,000  of  additional  interest  bearing  debt  under  such  circumstances  as  to 
allow  a  syndicate  of  native  and  foreign  bankers  to  realize  a  net  profit  of  millions 
on  a  single  deal.  It  stands  confessed  that  the  gold  standard  can  only  be  upheld 
by  so  depleting  our  paper  currency  as  to  force  the  prices  of  our  products  below 
the  European  and  even  below  the  Asiatic  level,  to  enable  us  to  sell  in  foreign 
markets,  thus  aggravating  the  very  evils  of  which  our  people  so  bitterly  com- 
plain, degrading  American  labor  and  striking  at  the  foundations  of  our  civili- 
zation itself.  The  advocates  of  the  gold  standard  persistently  claim  that  the 
cause  of  our  distress  is  overproduction — that  we  have  produced  so  much  that 
it  has  made  us  poor — which  implies  that  the  true  remedy  is  to  close  the  fac- 
tory, abandon  the  farm  and  throw  a  multitude  of  people  out  of  employment,  a 
doctrine  that  leaves  us  unnerved  and  disheartened  and  absolutely  without  hope 
for  the  future.  We  afBrm  it  to  be  unquestioned  that  there  can  be  no  such 
economic  paradox  as  overproduction  and  at  the  same  time  tens  of  thousands 
of  our  fellow  citizens  remaining  half  clothed  and  half  fed,  and  who  are  pite- 
ously  clamoring  for  the  common  necessities  of  life. 

Over  and  above  all  other  questions  of  policy,  we  are  in  favor  of  restoring 
to  the  people  of  the  United  States  the  time-honored  money  of  the  Constitu- 
tion— gold  and  silver;  not  one,  but  both — the  money  of  Washington  and  Ham- 
ilton and  Jeflferson  and  Monroe  and  Jackson  and  Lincoln,  to  the  end  that  the 
American  people  may  receive  honest  pay  for  an  honest  product;  that  an  Amer- 
ican debtor  may  pay  his  just  obligations  in  an  honest  standard  and  not  in  a 
standard  that  has  appreciated  one  hundred  per  cent,  above  all  the  great  staples 
of  our  country;  and  to  the  end,  further,  that  silver  standard  countries  may  be 
deprived  of  the  unjust  advantage  which  they  now  enjoy  in  the  diiTerence  in 
exchange  between  gold  and  silver — an  advantage  which  tariff  legislation  alone 
cannot  overcome. 

We  therefore  appeal  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  to  leave  in  abey- 
ance for  the  moment  all  other  questions,   however  important  and  even  mo- 


254  THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

mentous  they  may  appear,  to  sunder,  if  need  be,  all  former  party  ties  and  affilia- 
tions, and  unite  in  one  supreme  eflfort  to  free  themselves  and  their  children 
from  the  domination  of  the  money  power — a  power  more  destructive  than  any 
which  has  ever  been  fastened  upon  the  civilized  men  of  any  race  or  in  any  age. 
And  upon  the  consummation  of  our  desires  and  efforts  we  evoke  the  gracious 
favor  of  Divine  Providence. 

The  nominations  were  next  taken  up.  My  name  was  presented  by 
Hon.  Edward  C  Little,  of  Kansas,  who  spoke  as  follows : 

Mr.  Little's  Speech, 

By  the  gracious  favor  of  our  neighbor  Nebraska,  the  State  of  Kansas  is 
accorded  the  privilege  of  placing  before  this  convention  for  your  nomination, 
the  next  President  of  the  United  States.  A  long  generation  ago,  the  twin 
Territories  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska  were  cast  adrift  upon  the  waves  of  poli- 
tics, to  return  to  a  redeemed  and  regenerated  nation,  the  bread  of  human  free- 
dom on  the  waters  of  human  life.  In  that  great  epoch  Kansas  stood  first.  Her 
proud  history  is  written  yonder  in  your  stars.  Nebraska's  day  and  Nebraska's 
man  have  come.  The  ark  of  the  covenant  of  human  freedom  which  John 
Brown  of  Osawatomie  pitched  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Oread,  we  now  resign  to 
the  Valley  of  the  Platte.  Again  the  doors  of  the  nation's  theater  are  open. 
The  curtain  rises  and  Nebraska  takes  the  stage.  The  scene  has  shifted,  gentle- 
men, from  the  historic,  but  cabined,  cribbed  and  confined  walls  of  Faneuil  Hall, 
to  that  vaster  arena  in  which  the  Father  of  Waters  rolls  unfettered  to  the  sea. 

Through  a  long  term  of  years  the  world  has  experienced  a  depression  in 
business,  such  as  was  never  before  known,  touching  every  department  of  human 
industry,  reaching  every  quarter  of  the  civilized  globe,  and  involving  every 
Christian  land.  For  twenty-three  years  our  people  have  suffered  a  financial 
system  which  divided  all  we  own  and  doubled  all  we  owe.  Recent  events  have 
not  reassured  those  who  are  interested  in  maintaining  the  rights  of  average 
men.  Within  the  last  twelve  months  we  have  been  told  that  we  hold  the  right 
of  trial  by  jury  at  the  option  of  Federal  judges.  From  Runnymede  till  now  no 
man  of  Anglo-Saxon  blood  has  ever  dreamed  that  such  was  the  law.  Within 
the  last  twelve  months  our  highest  tribunal  has  reversed  a  decision  which  John 
Marshall  respected  and  to  which  Roger  Taney  bowed,  and  has  annulled  a  law 
that  was  made  when  the  foundations  of  the  Republic  were  laid.  Therefore  the 
incomes  of  the  great  fortunes  accumulated  during  the  last  thirty  years  pay  no 
tribute  to  support  the  government  which  protects  them.  That  great  convention 
which  recently  assembled  in  this  city  raised  no  voice  of  protest,  but  abandoning 
the  interests  and  deserting  the  traditions  of  the  American  people  for  the  first 
time  committed  the  Republican  party  to  the  maintenance  of  a  single  gold 
standard.  Is  life  so  dear  or  peace  so  sweet  as  to  be  purchased  at  the  rate  of 
$262,000,000  per  annum?  They  would  cover  the  American  f^ag  with  dollar 
marks  bigger  than  the  spots  on  the  sun.  They  put  William  McKinley  on  the 
platform  but  they  put  Grover  Cleveland  in  the  platform.  The  hand  was  the 
hand  of  Esau,  but  the  voice  was  the  voice  of  Jacob.  The  St.  Louis  Convention 
may  have  changed  its  mind  but  the  American  people  have  not  altered  their 
opinions.  They  have  thrown  down  the  gauntlet  and  we  cannot  honorably 
avoid  the  conflict. 


M 


/Li^-^Li^ 


THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION.  257 

Self  respect  will  not  permit  us  longer  to  defer  to  the  arrogant  assumptions 
of  those  whose  financial  policy  leaves  the  Treasury  unarmed,  unguarded,  un- 
picketed  against  the  raids  of  Wall  street  highwaymen,  and  brings  the  farmer 
so  low  that  his  products  go  like  salvation,  without  money  and  without  price. 
After  the  rank  incompetence  manifested  by  our  financiers  during  recent  years 
that  they  should  still  presume  to  instruct  anybody  is  the  very  impudence  of 
arrogant  audacity.  Columbia  has  reached  her  majority.  We  now  propose  that 
she  conduct  her  own  afifairs  without  dictation  from  foreign  financiers  or  sug- 
gestion from  foreign  parliament.  We  intend  to  enforce  every  sentence,  every 
clause,  every  word,  which  Thomas  Jefferson  put  in  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence. We  hoped  for  better  things  from  the  Republican  party.  Long 
enough  has  humanity  walked  through  the  fiery  furnace.  Soon  or  never  must 
God's  poor  be  led  by  stiller  waters  and  into  greener  pastures.  In  spite  of  Con- 
fucius and  Buddha,  of  Socrates  in  prison,  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  on  the  Cross, 
power  is  still  arrogant,  greed  is  still  impudent,  and  talent  is  still  selfish.  The 
time  has  come  to  determine  whether  this  nation  is  ruled  by  an  Almighty  Dollar 
or  by  an  Almighty  God. 

In  a  few  days  William  J.  Bryan  of  Nebraska  will  stand  in  Madison  Square 
Garden — the  champion  of  Lazarus  at  the  gates  of  Dives.  Both  will  be  present. 
The  Roman  ambassador  stood  before  the  Carthaginian  Senate  and  said:  "I 
hold  peace  and  war  in  the  folds  of  my  toga.  Which  shall  I  shake  out  to  you?" 
The  Carthaginians  cried,  "War,  war,"  and  were  swept  from  the  earth.  The 
eloquent  Senator  Vilas  of  Wisconsin  said  at  Chicago:  "Perhaps  somewhere  in 
this  country  there  lurks  a  Robespierre,  a  Danton,  a  Marat."  I  will  eliminate 
the  perhaps  for  the  distinguished  senator.  Always  in  the  swamps  of  want, 
in  the  jungles  of  poverty  there  lurks  a  Robespierre,  a  Danton,  a  Marat.  There 
be  men  in  this  country  who  will  do  well  to  listen  to  Mirabeau  that  Danton 
shall  never  come.  Christ  forgave  the  thief  and  pardoned  the  courtesan,  but  the 
money  changers  he  scourged  from  the  temple.  Long  enough  has  selfish  and 
greedy  thrift  dominated  the  councils  of  the  Republic.  Washington  never 
fought,  Warren  never  fell  to  establish  an  oligarchy  of  baronial  millionaires. 
Eighteen  centuries  have  passed  away,  but  it  is  not  yet  too  late  to  crucify  Barab- 
bas.     The  people  have  accepted  the  challenge  Wall  street  issued  at  St.  Louis. 

Pleasant  it  Is  for  the  Little  Tin  Gods, 

When   the   Great   Jove   nods. 

But  the  Little  Tin  Gods  make  their  mistakes. 

That  they  miss  the  hour  when  the  Great  Jove  wakes. 

The  sophistical  logic  of  "business"  argument  cannot  avoid,  the  enticing 
glitter  of  Lombard  gold  cannot  disguise,  the  sonorous  periods  of  rounded  elo- 
quence cannot  disprove  the  simple  proposition  that  for  a  long  term  of  years 
our  property  has  diminished  in  value,  while  our  liabilities  make  greater  demands 
than  are  named  in  the  stipulation.  The  honest  dollar  is  the  dollar  of  the  con- 
tract. We  stand  ready  to  endure  the  due  and  forfeit  of  our  bond — no  more, 
no  less.  "If  you  deny  it  fie  upon  your  law."  Therefore  we  have  assembled  in 
the  assured  conviction  of  the  ultimate  and  I  believe  the  immediate  triumph 
of  the  people's  cause.  To  doubt  it  is  to  impeach  the  intelligence  of  the  Amer- 
ican people.  To  deny  it  is  to  question  the  justice  of  the  Great  Creator.  There- 
fore I  present  to  you  no  Moses  to  lead  the  people  forty  years  in  the  wilderness, 
15 


258  .      THE  SILVER  PARTY  CONVENTION. 

but  a  gifted  young  Joshua  who  shall  bid  the  golden  sun  and  the  silver  moon 
stand  still  while  he  fights  the  battle  of  human  freedom. 

The  nation  cried  out  in  her  hour  of  peril  and  the  West  gave  her  Abraham 

Lincoln : 

The  land  that  loves  him  guards  his  rest. 
The   West,    the   West,    the    Rowdy    West. 

Again  the  nation  calls  and  the  West  gives  her  a  man  sprung  from  the  same 
soil,  inspired  by  the  same  motives,  loved  by  the  same  neight)ors,  and  blessed 
we  fondly  believe  by  the  same  God.  He  is  by  ancestry,  birth,  education  and 
experience,  instinctively  and  distinctively  an  American — the  very  flower  of  the 
nation's  purest  life. 

Civilization  oscillates  like  a  pendulum,  from  Solon  the  law-giver  to  Alexan- 
der the  Conqueror,  from  wolf-nursed  Romulus  to  Imperial  Caesar,  from  Alfred 
the  Liberator  to  Charles  the  Tyrant,  from  Charles  Martel  who  saved,  to  Louis 
Capet  who  squandered  Christendom,  from  Oliver  Cromwell  to  George  the 
Third,  from  George  Washington  to  Jefferson  Davis,  from  Abraham  Lincoln  to 
Grover  Cleveland.  At  the  termination  of  each  oscillation,  at  the  close  of  each 
epoch,  there  stands  a  Demosthenes,  a  Brutus,  a  John  Hampden,  a  Mirabeau,  a 
Patrick  Henry  or  a  John  Brown  of  Kansas.  The  pendulum  of  human  liberty  has 
reached  the  end  of  the  arc.  We  are  at  the  conclusion  of  an  epoch.  The  hour 
has  come,  the  man  appeared,  the  hero  has  been  found.  Worthy  to  stand  by 
Demosthenes  and  Brutus  and  Hampden  and  Mirabeau  and  Henry  and  Brown 
is  this  most  typical  product  of  our  Western  civilization.  Him  I  name  to  you 
for  your  suffrages  for  the  highest  office  within  the  gift  of  the  American 
Republic — William  J,  Bryan  of  Nebraska. 

The  nomination  was  seconded  by  Hon.  L.  C.  Pace  of  Nebraska, 
Messrs.  McGinley  of  Michigan,  Basher  of  Iowa,  Turner  of  Ohio,  Baker 
of  California,  Wedderburn  of  Virginia,  Doniphan  of  Missouri,  Mc- 
Bride  of  Washington,  Towne  of  Minnesota,  Clarno  of  Oregon,  and 
Mrs.  Stansberry  of  Colorado.  No  other  name  being  placed  before  the 
convention,  the  nomination  was  made  by  acclamation. 

The  convention  then  proceeded  to  the  nomination  of  a  candidate  for 
Vice-President,  but  no  speeches  were  delivered.  Mr.  Alexander 
Troop,  of  Connecticut,  presented  the  name  of  Hon.  Arthur  Sewall,  of 
Maine;  the  nomination  was  seconded  by  Mr.  H.  T.  Niles,  of  Ohio. 
Mr.  Sewall  was  made  the  nominee  by  acclamation. 

In  mentioning  those  who  participated  in  the  Silver  Convention,  I 
have  been  compelled  to  rely  upon  newspaper  accounts  of  the  conven- 
tion and,  therefore,  much  to  my  regret,  have  been  sometimes  unable 
to  give  the  initials  of  persons  referred  to. 


CHAPTER   XV. 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

THE  Populist  National  Convention  met  in  St.  Louis  on  the  22(1 
of  July,  1896.  As  in  the  case  of  the  convention  of  the  Na- 
tional Silver  party,  I  am  compelled  to  rely  upon  the  news- 
paper reports,  and,  therefore,  am  unable  to  give  the  full  names  of  all 
to  whom  I  refer  as  taking  part  in  the  proceedings.  Senator  Marion 
Butler,  of  North  Carolina,  one  of  the  recognized  leaders  of  the  Populist 
party,  was  elected  temporary  chairman,  and,  in  taking  the  chair,  said: 

Mr.  Butler's  Speech. 

Fellow  Citizens:  All  history  teaches  that  there  come  great  crises  in  the 
affairs  of  men,  and  all  history  teaches  that  humanity  is  blest  and  raised  to  a 
high  level  or  temporarily  cursed,  according  as  the  men  upon  whose  shoulders 
rest  the  responsibility  are  able  to  meet  the  crisis  with  wisdom  and  patriotism 
and  to  use  it  for  the  betterment  of  humanity.  Two  political  parties  have  held 
national  conventions  this  year.  Both  have  had  their  say,  made  their  promises, 
and  put  forward  their  leaders. 

Another  political  party,  young,  but  a  growing  giant  in  strength,  has 
assembled  to  speak  to  the  American  people  at  this  important  and  critical  hour. 

We  are  here  because  there  is  need  for  us  to  be  here.  The  two  parties  that 
have  already  spoken  have  between  them  had  charge  of  the  machinery  of  a  great 
representative  government,  in  which  kind  of  government  there  are  the  greatest 
possibilities  for  good  and  for  evil — the  kind  of  government  where  the  pros- 
perity of  the  people  or  their  misery  can  be  affected  to  the  greatest  degree. 
The  two  parties  have  between  them  had  charge  of  your  government  for  over 
twenty-five  years,  and  during  that  time  a  great  and  prosperous  people,  a  people 
laboring  to  carry  out  the  injunction  to  make  two  blades  of  grass  grow  where 
one  grew  before,  have  performed  their  duty  in  the  eyes  of  God  and  man,  and 
have  made  this  country  blossom  like  a  rose,  as  far  as  creating  wealth  was  con- 
cerned, yet  during  this  time  of  unexampled  creation  of  wealth,  of  unexampled 
industry  and  economy  on  the  part  of  the  people,  these  two  parties  have  suc- 
ceeded in  bringing  this  great  nation  to  the  verge  of  ruin. 

Did  they  know  better,  or  did  they  not  know  better?  Were  they  honestly 
mistaken,  or  did  they  do  it  on  purpose?  In  either  event  their  leadership  is  a 
discredit  to  the  existence  of  the  party  and  the  necessity  of  this  organization 
is  proven.  Every  candidate  put  before  the  American  people  since  the  war  by 
both  of  these  parties  has  been  a  man  whose  nomination  and  election  has  car- 
ried joy  to  the  hearts  of  aggregated  capital  and  combined  greed.  They  have 
selected  the  men  who  have  stood  in  touch  with,  and  been  the  allied  agents  of, 

259 


260  THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

the  powers  that  have  brought  this  country  to  the  verge  of  bankruptcy,  and  these 
powers,  which  have  destroyed  every  republic  in  the  past,  will  destroy  this  one 
unless  checked.  My  friends,  these  two  great  parties,  under  false  leadership, 
have  during  this  period  succeeded  in  keeping  from  the  people  the  greatest  issue 
in  American  politics;  they  have  managed  to  array  the  great  masses  of  the 
American  voters  with  frenzied  zeal  on  two  sides  of  great  national  campaigns, 
when  the  issue  was  a  sham  put  up  for  the  purpose  of  dividing  the  people.  It 
made  no  difference  which  side  won,  the  people  lost. 

Wall  street  in  the  United  States  and  Lombard  street  in  England  won. 
While  these  things  were  going  on  the  great  American  heart  was  wrapped  in 
party  prejudice.  It  was  not  until  they  had  awakened  from  this  condition 
and  aroused  themselves  that  they  began  to  think  upon  these  questions.  Then 
it  was  that  the  great  middle  classes  began  to  put  their  heads  together  for 
their  common  good;  and  when  that  small  cloud  appeared  upon  the  horizon, 
the  hearts  of  the  people  of  the  country  went  forth,  and  the  light  of  this 
doctrine  spread  throughout  the  land.  It  was  at  that  time  that  God  raised  up  a 
Moses  to  lead  us  out  of  the  land  of  darkness.  It  was  then  that  Col. 
L.  L.  Polk  came  to  the  rescue,  and  with  that  foresight  and  wisdom  that  seem 
to  have  been  prompted  by  Providence,  he  foresaw  that  unless  sectional 
feeling  engendered  by  the  issues  of  the  war  could  be  allayed,  no  progress 
could  be  made.  He  foresaw  that  as  long  as  the  people  were  arrayed  against 
each  other  by  passion  and  prejudice,  so  long  would  the  enemies  of  mankind 
combine  to  use  the  great  weapon  of  sectional  prejudices  to  the  detriment 
of  the  people  and  destroy  their  prosperity  and  property.  Then  it  was  that 
that  grand  patriot  left  his  home  and  gave  his  life  to  his  country.  Then  it 
was  that  he  went  with  a  message  to  the  north  and  to  the  east  and  to  the 
west;  then  it  was  that  he  came  back  to  the  south  with  a  message  from  our 
northern  friends. 

At  this  hour  there  stands  at  Raleigh  an  enduring  monument;  and  the 
proudest  inscription  to  be  put  on  that  monument  will  be,  "Here  lies  the  man 
who  broke  down  Mason  and  Dixon's  line." 

My  friends,  the  minute  that  all  bitterness  is  laid  aside  and  the  hearts  of  the 
people  beat  as  one,  that  very  minute  the  American  people  begin  to  act  for 
themselves.  Then  it  was  that  the  people  who  had  been  trodden  into  the 
dust  and  loaded  with  great  burdens  knew  that  their  interests  were  the  same 
as  the  people  of  the  north  and  the  east.  That  very  moment  they  placed 
themselves  upon  the  same  platform  of  principles  founded  by  Thomas  Jefferson 
and  Abraham  Lincoln.  In  1892  we  went  down  to  defeat,  but  our  principles 
grew  and  flourished  because  they  could  not  be  trampled  down.  They  were 
eternal;  they  were  right,  and  from  that  hour  to  this  they  have  continued  to 
grow  throughout  this  broad  land. 

A  few  weeks  ago  the  great  Republican  party  met  in  this  city.  The  poli- 
ticians again  wanted  to  straddle  the  great  issue  that  was  before  the 
people  but  the  People's  party  had  exposed  the  straddling  treachery.  The 
logic  of  events  caused  them  to  express  themselves  clearly  upon  the  ques- 
tion of  the  day,  and  consequently  they  went  over,  bag  and  baggage,  to  the 
great  money  kings  of  Wall  street  and  of  Europe. 

A  few  weeks  after  that  there  came  another  evidence  of  this  great  move- 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.  261 

ment.  The  great  Democratic  party  met  in  Chicago  and  was  forced  there  to 
take  a  position,  for  they  could  not  evade  the  issue  longer;  they  were  frightened; 
they  were  so  alarmed,  and  some  of  them,  no  doubt,  so  conscience-stricken, 
that  they  formally  decided  to  deliberately  commit  petty  and  grand  larceny  by 
stealing  the  People's  party  platform  almost  entire.  They  almost  tried  to  get 
into  our  party.  I  am  reminded  of  the  old  fellow  who  had  his  Bible  stolen.  He 
said:    "Faith,  and  I  hope  it  will  cure  the  disease." 

My  friends,  I  hope  it  will  cure  the  disease.  My  only  surprise  is  that 
when  they  were  stealing,  they  did  not  steal  all  the  platform.  If  they  had  been 
frightened  a  little  worse,  I  think  they  would.  By  the  time  this  money  ques- 
tion is  settled  and  before,  too,  if  we  don't  hurry  up,  the  great  transportation 
question — that  great  question  which  stands  side  by  side  with  the  money  ques- 
tion— will  be  upon  you. 

A  delegate:    "What  will  they  do  with  the  transportation  question?" 

Senator  Butler:     "They  will  straddle  it." 

My  friends,  the  great  transportation  question  with  the  great  financial 
question,  are  the  two  questions  that  must  be  solved  before  you  can  ever  destroy 
these  trusts  and  combines.  The  Standard  Oil  Trust  could  not  exist  in  this 
land  if  it  were  not  for  its  co-partnership  with  the  transportation  companies  of 
the  United  States.  The  old  parties  of  trusts  and  combines  must  turn  their 
eyes  to  the  thing  that  produces  trusts  and  combines.  When  they  do  that,  then 
they  will  strike  the  tap  root  of  all  the  evil  that  has  afflicted  them — the  evils 
of  finance  and  transportation. 

My  friends,  by  the  time  you  get  this  great  financial  question  settled,  this 
transportation  question  will  be  a  burning  question — a  question  as  demoralizing 
to  the  old  parties  and  as  potent  in  awakening  the  American  people  to  their 
condition  as  the  great  financial  question  has  been;  and  if  it  had  been  as  strong 
in  the  hearts  of  the  people,  the  Democratic  party  would  have  declared  for  it  in 
its  convention.  The  People's  party  came  into  existence  to  perform  a  great 
mission.  There  was  a  necessity  for  it,  and  it  is  going  to  stay  here  as 
long  as  there  is  any  necessity  for  it. 

As  long  as  the  American  people  need  an  organization  that  is  true,  and 
one  that  will  stand  by  them  under  all  circumstances  and  give  them  the 
rights  to  which  they  are  entitled,  this  party  will  continue  to  exist.  If  the 
People's  party  were  to  go  out  of  existence  tomorrow,  the  next  Democratic 
National  Convention  would  repudiate  the  platform  it  recently  adopted  at  Chi- 
cago, and  Mr.  Bryan  would  stand  no  more  chance  four  years  hence  of  being 
nominated  by  that  party  than  Thomas  Jefiferson  would  if  he  were  alive. 

Now,  my  friends,  we  have  done  a  good  deal.  No  young  party  has  ever 
accomplished  so  much  in  the  same  length  of  time  as  we  have  done.  We 
have  endured  the  bitterness  of  denunciation  and  the  abuse  and  malignity  of 
party  feeling.  Right  here  comes  upon  us  the  greatest  responsibility  that 
has  ever  rested  upon  any  party.  We  have  raised  an  issue  so  universal,  so 
great,  so  important,  that  we  have  split  both  of  the  old  parties  in  two.  Now 
we  have  either  to  save  that  issue  or  to  renounce  what  we  have  gained  and 
lay  it  down  in  defeat.  No  greater  responsibility  ever  rested  upon  any  con- 
vention. 

Fellow  citizens,  shall  it  ever  be  said — remember  we  are  making  history, 


262  THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

and  prosperity  or  misery — shall  it  ever  be  said  in  the  future  that  this  great  band  of 
patriots  who  have  had  the  nerve  and  the  courage  to  leave  the  parties  of  a 
lifetime — this  great  band  of  patriots  who  have  broken  every  tie  that  bound 
us  and  our  fathers  and  our  grandfathers  in  political  organization — shall  it 
ever  be  said  that,  after  we  have  forced  this  issue  to  the  front,  we  at  this  trying 
and  critical  hour  shall  ourselves  be  controlled  more  by  party  prejudice  than 
by  patriotism? 

The  only  way  to  build  up  this  party  is  by  appealing  to  the  best  element 
of  the  old  parties  and  appealing  to  their  patriotism  by  telling  them  that  this 
issue  is  greater  than  party.  That  is  the  only  way  we  have  ever  taken  a  single 
man  out  of  the  old  parties  who  was  worth  having.  And  it  is  the  only  way  we 
shall  ever  take  any  man  out  of  them  in  the  future  who  is  worth  having.  In  this 
solemn  hour  let  us  drop  the  bitter  feelings  that  may  have  been  engendered 
since  we  came  here.  Let  us  stop  believing  that  in  one  small  head  all  wisdom 
and  patriotism  are  contained.  I  have  seen  since  I  have  been  here  one  set 
of  patriots  going  to  one  extreme,  almost,  it  seemed,  with  more  enthusiasm 
and  madness  than  with  reason.  I  have  seen  another  set  of  patriots  equally 
honest,  equally  devoted  to  truth  and  right,  equally  desirous  of  seeing  the  great- 
est good  done  for  the  greatest  number,  going  to  the  opposite  extreme.  I  have 
seen  one  extreme  impugn  the  motives  of  the  other,  and  the  other  extreme  return 
the  compliment.  I  have  even  heard  a  few  thoughtless  men  charge  that  Hanna 
was  running  one,  and  others  charge  that  the  Democracy  was  running  the 
other.  My  friends,  I  have  seen  enough  faith  in  the  faces  before  me,  and 
enough  faith  in  the  God  above  me,  to  believe  that  this  convention  will  not 
turn  itself  into  a  Democratic  annex.  I  have  too  much  faith  in  its  patriotism 
and  in  its  sense  to  believe  that  it  will  turn  itself  into  a  Republican  annex. 
There  is  your  danger.  There  stands  one  danger  and  here  stands  another,  and 
one  is  as  big  as  the  other.  It  has  been  a  part  of  my  experience  that,  whenever 
you  see  some  good  men  going  to  one  extreme  and  other  good  men  going 
to  the  other  extreme,  the  path  of  truth  lies  between  them.  At  this  hour 
we  need  a  Benjamin  Franklin  to  rise  over  this  body  as  he  did  when  the  war- 
ring factions  were  framing  our  Constitution.  This  great  patriot  and  Christian 
arose  when  the  crisis  had  come,  and,  raising  his  hand,  said:  "Let  us  all  fol- 
low in  prayer." 

A  great  stillness  came  over  the  meeting,  they  prayed,  asking  for  inspiration 
and  wisdom  from  on  high,  and  from  that  hour  on  history  tells  us  that  that  great 
convention  ceased  to  wrangle,  and  became  a  deliberative  body,  and  every  man 
reasoned  and  had  patience  with  his  brother.  It  was  that  seeming  grace  that 
gave  us  our  great  Constitution.  And  if  this  convention  today  rises  to  the 
height  of  patriotism  that  is  necessary  to  save  this  country,  it  must  be  con- 
trolled by  the  same  feeling  and  with  the  same  inspiration  from  on  high. 

At  this  point  Delegate  Doggett,  of  California,  cried  out,  "Nominate  a  Pop- 
ulist, without  any  reference  to  what  the  other  parties  have  done  heretofore." 

My  friend,  there,  has  an  honest  belief.  I  am  mighty  apt  to  hear  from 
another  man  over  here  on  the  other  side  if  I  wait  a  little.  Both  think  they  are 
right.  But  if  this  party  lives  (and  God  grant  that  it  shall  never  die)  and  rises 
to  the  mission  that  it  was  born  to  accomplish,  it  must  at  this  critical  hour  have 
the  patriotism,  the  unselfishness  of  party  pride  to  do  just  what  we  have  been 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.  263 

preaching  for  the  last  four  years.  If  this  convention  won't  follow  its  own 
teachings,  it  is  unworthy  to  represent  the  people  at  home. 

We  have  two  extremes  here,  but  it  won't  do  to  ruin  this  convention.  We 
have  to  reason.  What  must  we  do?  It  is  proper  and  right;  it  is  fitting  for  a 
great  party  that  had  its  birth  on  the  broad  cornfields  and  cottonfields  of  the 
South  and  the  broad  wheatfields  of  the  West  to  have  the  wisdom  and  the 
patriotism  to  winnow  the  chaflf  from  the  wheat.  What  should  we  do?  (A 
voice,   "Nominate  Bryan.") 

My  friends,  we  are  told  that  whom  the  Gods  would  destroy  they  first  make 
mad.  I  want  to  counsel  our  good  and  enthusiastic  friends  that  every  time 
they  shout  out  here  and  interrupt,  they  are  hurting  our  cause.  This  conven- 
tion is  not  going  to  be  ruled  by  any  wild  sentiment  by  either  side,  I  believe. 
This  convention  has  not  been  crushed  by  the  other  parties  and  it  will  not 
be  stampeded  by  the  moon.  What  is  our  duty?  It  is  to  indorse  and  approve 
what  is  right  and  condemn  what  is  wrong.  Any  other  course  is  not  true  Popu- 
lism. The  mission  of  the  People's  party  has  been  to  strike  out  what  is  wrong 
and  to  uphold  what  is  right.  And  we  have  appealed  to  patriotism  to  rise  above 
the  party  to  do  this  and  our  appeal  has  brought  forth  two  millions  of  patriots, 
and  there  are  two  million  more  patriots  coming  swooping  into  our  camp. 
Listen,  and  I  will  tell  you  what  you  will  find  when  you  get  home.  I  have 
been  down  on  the  old  plantation  at  home  where  I  was  raised;  I  lived  with 
a  band  of  farmers  representing  all  three  political  parties,  and  they  were  at  the 
train  and  shook  my  hand  when  I  left.  The  way  those  men  felt  is  about  the 
way  the  great  American  heart  feels  today.  They  said:  "Butler,  let  us  rise  to 
that  patriotic  position  that  will  make  us  have  the  confidence  and  respect  of 
every  honest  man  in  the  old  parties." 

If  ever  we  gain  another  vote,  we  must  gain  it  by  being  consistent  now. 
One  man  who  is  a  Populist  said:  "Butler,  I  will  never  go  back  to  the  Dem- 
ocratic party.  I  have  no  confidence  in  its  leaders.  I  am  willing  to  acknowl- 
edge what  good  they  do,  as  far  as  they  go,  but  no  further."  A  Republican  said 
to  me:  "I  have  been  taught  to  hate  the  Democratic  party.  I  have  been 
taught  to  believe  that  the  Republican  party  contained  all  the  patriotism  and 
unselfishness  in  the  country,  and  at  this  hour  I  stand  free  and  foot-loose, 
ready  to  obey  the  dictates  of  conscience  and  to  lead  in  the  way  that  will  bring 
the  best  American  victory  to  the  American  people."  Now,  my  friends,  if  this 
is  not  Populism,  if  this  is  not  the  doctrine  that  you  have  taught  in  your  home 
and  in  your  township  and  in  your  county  to  build  up  the  People's  party,  then 
your  Populists  are  not  like  those  in  my  section.  The  doctrine  I  am  now 
preaching  is  the  doctrine  we  built  the  party  on,  and  I  tell  you  today  if  you  waver 
from  your  position  of  consistency,  from  this  high  patriotic  position  your 
party  is  built  on,  you  talk  no  better  than  the  old  parties  that  you  rose  up  to 
destroy. 

There  is  not  a  man  in  this  hall  who,  if  he  will  go  to  his  room  tonight  and 
get  down  on  his  knees,  and  pray  to  Almighty  God  to  take  all  the  prejudice  and 
all  the  partisan  feeling  out  of  his  heart,  and  ask  His  aid  to  do  as  a  true  Populist 
ought  to  do,  but  will  rise  saying:  "It  is  my  duty  to  stand  by  what  I  have 
taught  in  the  past  and  let  it  lead  where  it  may." 

My  friends,  there  is  not  a  man  in  the  People's  party  that  loves  it  more 


264  THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

and  has  more  cause  to  be  revenged  against  the  old  parties  than  I.  There  is 
danger  of  those  patriotic  enough  to  leave  the  old  parties  becoming  prejudiced 
to  such  an  extent  as  to  be  controlled  by  their  feelings  instead  of  their  hearts  and 
reasons.  I  believe  that  this  convention  is  going  to  do  what  is  wisest.  I  believe 
it  IS  going  to  stand  together.  It  is  not  going  to  split.  How  can  it?  We  split 
both  of  the  old  parties  and  we  split  them  on  a  principle.  We  cannot  split, 
because  we  all  stand  for  the  same  principles.  And  of  course  a  party  that  has 
raised  up  a  great  principle  and  split  the  two  old  parties  is  not  going  to  be  fool- 
ish enough  to  allow  itself  to  split  on  method  and  detail.  We  will  stand 
together.  We  will  go  home  from  here  a  united  band  of  brothers.  We  will 
strip  our  coats  for  the  fray  and  see  the  millions  of  organized  capital  and  gold 
monopoly  stricken  down  in  this  country.  We  will  do  more  than  that.  We 
will  show  you  that  this  young  giant,  the  People's  party,  comes  out  of  that 
campaign  stronger  than  it  went  into  it.  Mark  you,  the  old  parties  will  make 
mistakes  in  the  future  as  they  have  in  the  past.  This  party  is  going  to  stand 
ready  to  hit  them  and  take  in  their  honest  men  at  every  mistake  they  make. 
We  are  willing  to  approve  everything  right  they  do,  and  we  will  condemn 
them  when  they  blunder,  or  when  they  betray  us  as  they  have  in  the  past.  Re- 
member that  you  are  People's  party  men;  that  you  have  accomplishd  more 
in  four  years  than  the  old  parties  have  accomplished  in  a  hundred.  Remember 
that  if  we  do  our  duty  at  this  hour,  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when  we  will  be 
the  majority  party  in  America. 

The  convention  chose  for  its  permanent  chairman  Hon.  William 
V.  Allen,  of  Nebraska,  who  obtained  national  prominence  soon  after 
his  election  to  the  Senate  by  a  very  able  speech  of  fourteen  and  three- 
quarters  hours'  duration  in  opposition  to  the  unconstitutional  repeal 
of  the  Sherman  law.  He  addressed  the  convention  at  considerable 
length;  his  remarks  are,  in  part,  reproduced  below: 

Mr.  Allen's  Speech. 

Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  I  beg  leave  to  return 
my  thanks  for  this  distinguished  mark  of  confidence  and  esteem.  I  assure  you 
that  when  I  came  here,  and  to  within  a  few  moments  ago,  I  had  no  intention 
of  doing  more  than  performing  my  duty  as  a  member  of  the  delegation  from 
Nebraska.  I  would  greatly  prefer  to  discharge  the  duties  of  a  delegate  from 
that  splendid  commonwealth,  than  to  occupy  this  position,  distinguished  and 
honorable  as  it  is.  But  it  was  thought  proper,  by  a  portion  of  the  delegates 
present,  that  my  name  should  be  presented  as  your  presiding  officer  and  per- 
haps it  was  an  evil  moment  when  I  consented  that  it  might  be  used.  If  I  shall 
be  able,  in  the  discharge  of  the  duties  incumbent  on  me  as  your  permanent  pre- 
siding officer,  to  satisfy  you  as  well  and  discharge  the  duties  of  the  position 
as  impartially  as  your  temporary  chairman  has,  I  shall  be  satisfied  with  myself, 
and  I  feel  confident  you  will  be  satisfied  with  me. 

On  occasions  like  this  it  is  supposed  that  the  presiding  officer  will  outline 
the  views  of  the  party  he  represents,  respecting  the  principles  and  policy  it 
should  adopt,  and  then  a  speech  of  acceptance  is  prepared  a  week  or  more 


•      THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.  265 

in  advance,  and  spoken  as  though  impromptu.  If  you  had  notified  me  some 
time  ago  of  your  purpose  to  make  me  permanent  chairman  of  the  conven- 
tion, I  assure  you  I  would  have  had  a  fair  impromptu  speech  prepared  for 
the  occasion,  but  you  were  not  kind  enough  to  do  that  and  I  am  compelled  to 
rely  on  the  promptings  of  the  moment  for  what  I  may  say. 

Let  it  be  understood  that  we  are  all  Populists.  If  any  delegate  in  this  con- 
vention has  a  lingering  suspicion  in  his  mind  that  the  delegates  here  are  not 
Populists,  let  him,  in  a  spirit  of  charity,  and  in  vindication  of  the  truth, 
abandon  it. 

I  read  in  one  of  the  local  papers  that  the  Populist  convention  is  in  this 
great  metropolis  of  the  Mississippi  Valley,  preparing  to  die.  I  have  no  doubt 
the  expression  was  prompted  by  a  desire  on  the  part  of  the  British  gold  power 
and  its  representatives  on  the  Republican  ticket  that  the  party  will  perish  from 
the  face  of  the  earth,  but  if  the  editor  of  that  paper  is  in  the  convention  tonight 
and  has  witnessed  these  extremes  of  enthusiasm,  these  soul-stirring  scenes 
of  patriotism,  I  beg  him  to  modify  his  opinion  respecting  the  destiny  of  this 
great  political  organization. 

In  the  Populist  party  we  know  no  section.  We  know  no  North,  no  South, 
no  East,  no  West.  The  man  who  lives  on  the  Gulf  or  in  Florida  is  as  sacred  to 
us  as  those  who  live  on  the  borders  of  the  British  possessions.  The  man  who 
dwells  on  the  Atlantic  is  loved  by  the  Populists  (if  he  be  a  true  man  and  a  true 
patriot)  as  much  as  the  citizen  who  dwells  on  the  shores  of  the  Pacific 
Ocean. 

I  thank  God  it  was  a  part  of  the  mission  of  this  great  political  party  of  the 
people  to  destroy  sectionalism,  and  as  a  citizen  of  Northern  birth  and  raising, 
I  will  say  in  this  great  presence  that  I  have  as  profound  a  respect  for  the 
rights  and  citizenship  of  the  man  who  dwells  in  the  South  as  I  have  for  my  own 
or  for  my  neighbors'. 

The  old  political  parties  have  been  divided  on  Mason  and  Dixon's  line. 
Our  fellow  citizens  north  have  been  told  that  all  that  was  required  for  the 
destruction  of  the  Union  was  to  permit  their  brethren  south  of  that  line  to 
come  into  possession  of  the  Government,  and  the  same  thing,  in  substance,  was 
asserted  in  the  Southern  sections  of  our  country,  and  during  this  time,  while 
we  were  following  the  banner  of  the  Republican  party  on  the  one  hand  and  that 
of  Bourbon  Democracy  on  the  other,  the  gold  power  of  the  world,  represented 
by  its  agents  in  the  United  States,  was  fastening  the  chains  of  an  industrial 
slavery  on  the  people  so  firmly  that  it  will  take  a  generation  to  strike  them  off. 
It  was  a  part  of  the  mission  of  the  Populist  party  to  free  the  people  from  the 
sectional  prejudice  with  which  they  had  become  thoroughly  imbued,  and  now 
we  can  meet  in  a  great  convention  like  this,  representing  forty-five  States  and 
the  various  Territories  of  the  Union,  struggling  and  contending  among  our- 
selves, in  a  friendly  way,  for  the  mastery,  but  when  the  majority  shall  have 
spoken,  we  will  bow  to  its  will  with  a  determination  to  carry  it  into  execution 
at   the   polls. 

If  any  one  has  come  here,  or  occupies  these  galleries,  suspecting  that  there 
will  be  a  bolt,  let  me  say  to  him  that  he  will  be  mistaken.  When  every  repre- 
sentative and  every  State  and  Territory  shall  be  heard,  and  the  result  be  known 
and  dispassionately  considered,  I  am  satisfied  I  can  say  for  my  friends  from 


266  THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.       * 

Texas  and  Maine  that  they  will  bow  to  the  will  of  the  convention  as  expressed 
by  the  majority  on  this  floor.  I  do  not  doubt  that  in  Wall  street  at  this 
moment  there  is  strong  hope  that  the  convention  will  split  and  that  the 
party  will  be  disrupted  and  absorbed  by  the  Republican  party,  because  that  is 
the  party  that  will  be  supported  by  Wall  street  this  fall. 

Doubtless  there  are  in  this  building  at  this  moment  the  minions  of  Wall 
street.  They  have  been  in  the  hotels  at  night  clothed  in  the  badges  of  dele- 
gates, and  with  a  lie  upon  their  lips,  saying  they  are  delegates  to  this  convention 
representing  some  State  or  Territory.  They  are  not  delegates.  They  were  and 
are  the  purchased  chattels  of  the  British  gold  power;  they  are  the  minions  and 
servile  tools  of  that  power  that  has  enslaved  the  people  for  a  quarter  of  a 
century,  that  would  fasten  the  chains  of  industrial  servitude  on  us  so  strongly 
that  we  could  not  force  them  from  our  limbs;  they  are  not  Populists.  But 
we  have  been  able  to  discover  these  creatures.  The  good  sense,  the  patriotism, 
the  good  judgment  and  the  honesty  of  delegates  have  induced  them  to  dis- 
cover and  avoid  all  persons  of  this  kind,  and  when  this  convention  shall  speak 
and  put  a  ticket  in  the  field,  that  is  to  achieve  victory  in  November,  these 
creatures,  who  prowl  like  jackals  in  a  graveyard,  will  go  back  to  their  dens, 
without  the  fruits  of  victory,  from  their  mission  to  St.  Louis. 

It  has  been  a  common  expression  of  our  enemies,  that  the  Populist  party  is 
a  party  of  anarchists.  We  have  read  it  in  the  public  press,  in  that  part  of  the 
press  which  has  a  gold  collfr  around  its  neck,  with  a  chain  attached  to  it  held 
by  the  Rothschilds  and  their  agents.  We  have  heard  it  on  the  lips  of  ignorant 
partisans.  We  hear  it  among  men  who  vote  the  Republican  ticket  for  no  other 
reason  than  that  their  fathers  voted  it  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago.  When  I  first 
entered  Congress  it  was  quite  a  common  thing  for  the  opposition  to  speak  of 
the  Populist  party  as  anarchists,  but  it  is  not  so  popular  now.  As  I  under- 
stand Populism  and  Populistic  principles,  they  mean  a  just,  intelligent  and  en- 
lightened Government,  where  security  is  found  for  persons  and  property — a 
Government  where  every  man,  woman  and  child  can  stand  beneath  the  folds 
of  the  American  flag  and  know  that  their  rights  are  fully  protected  in  their 
entirety.  If  any  man  has  come  here  who  wants  to  destroy  the  Government 
property,  or  who  is  an  enemy  to  social  order,  or  who  opposes  wealth  in  the 
hands  of  those  who  have  acquired  it  by  honest  means,  he  will  not  find  a 
welcome.  The  Populist  party  has  no  place  for  him.  It  is  not  so  common  now 
as  it  used  to  be,  to  hear  this  talk  of  anarchists  and  revolutionists.  The  other 
political  parties  are  beginning  to  recognize  the  inevitable.  In  the  Senate,  where 
we  have  the  balance  of  power,  these  epithets  are  no  longer  heard,  and  in  those 
States  where  we  have  the  balance  of  power  and  can  bring  defeat  or  victory  by 
our  votes  we  are  no  longer  assailed  by  opprobrious  epithets,  but  are  addressed 
in  courteous  language  and  are  frequently  asked:  "What  will  our  Populist 
friends  have?    What  do  they  think  of  this  or  that  question?" 

As  we  have  the  balance  of  power  in  the  Senate  and  have  forced  from  that 
body  respectful  treatment,  we  may  as  well  possess  the  balance  of  power  be- 
tween the  Democratic  and  Republican  party  in  the  nation.  This  consummation 
lies  within  our  reach.  Now,  what  course  shall  we  pursue,  and  what  shall  be 
done?  I  see  here  in  the  convention  several  banners  on  which  are  the  words: 
"Keep  in  the  middle  of  the  road."     I  not  only  want  to  keep  in  the  middle  of 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.  267 

the  road — I  not  only  want  the  Populist  party  to  keep  in  the  middle  of  the 
road — but  I  want  it  to  take  all  the  road  and  force  all  other  parties  out.  We  must 
not  get  into  that  stupid  attitude  where  we  are  willing  to  stand  so  closely  in  the 
middle  of  the  road  that  others  will  pass  us  in  the  race  for  success. 

No  one  has  thus  far  defined  the  "middle  of  the  road."  We  inscribe  it  on 
our  banners  and  yet  if  you  will  ask  a  man  for  a  definition  no  two  will  agree.  As 
I  understand  "middle  of  the  road,"  it  means  that  the  old  party  methods  of 
corruption,  fraud  and  ballot-box  stuffing,  which  have  been  resorted  to  in  secur- 
ing elections,  must  be  abandoned  and  a  course  that  is  pure,  that  is  lofty, 
patriotic  and  just  shall  be  adopted.  That  is  "the  middle  of  the  road,"  as  I 
understand  it.  We  will  require  the  exercise  of  much  good  sense  in  our  delibera- 
tions. We  must  use  common  sense  in  the  transaction  of  our  political  business, 
just  as  a  successful  business  man  must  apply  it  in  his  daily  affairs.  If  we  fail  to 
do  so,  we  cannot  succeed.  Common  sense,  business  judgment  and  business 
methods  must  be  applied  in  politics,  as  in  other  successful  undertakings. 

We  have  presented  to  us  an  anomalous  condition.  The  Republican  party 
has  declared,  throughout  its  history,  in  favor  of  bimetallism.  In  1888  it  con- 
demned the  Democratic  party  for  an  attempt  to  demonetize  silver.  In  1892  it 
declared  itself  in  favor  of  bimetallism  and  free  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  and 
primary  money  on  terms  of  equality.  In  1896  it  surrendered  its  existence,  its 
manhood  and  all  the  glory  of  its  history,  to  the  control  and  keeping  of  the 
British  gold  power  and  abandoned  bimetallism;  notwithstanding  gold  and  silver 
are  and  have  been  money  of  the  Constitution  from  the  formation  of  the 
Government;  notwithstanding  the  fathers  recognized  them  as  money  metals; 
notwithstanding  they  had  been  coined  for  eighty-one  years  of  our  national  exist- 
ence before  demonetization ;  notwithstanding  the  Republican  party  had  declared 
in  favor  of  bimetallism  from  the  earliest  period  up  to  this  year.  The  last  conven- 
tion of  that  party  surrendered  complete  control  of  its  organization  to  the 
British  gold  power,  and  now  we  are  brazenly  told  that  we  must  take  the  single 
gold  standard,  whether  we  will  or  not;  that  we  must  take  it  at  its  abnormal  value 
of  200  per  cent. ;  take  it  with  all  the  evil  consequences  of  falling  prices,  enforced 
idleness  and  misery  among  the  people.  We  are  told  that  we  must  take  it 
because  the  holders  of  American  securities  require  their  pay  in  "honest  money." 
Who  is  the  chief  representative  of  that  great  power  on  this  continent?  The  man 
who  declared  in  Congress  in  favor  of  bimetallism  repeatedly;  a  modern  Na- 
poleon, whose  sole  resemblance  to  the  real  Napoleon  we  have  read  of  and  ad- 
mired is  in  the  hat  he  wears.  This  is  the  man  who  declares  that  silver  shall 
no  longer  be  money  of  the  Constitution.  True,  he  has  declared  that  the  de- 
monetization of  silver  is  unjust  and  that  it  brought  want  and  misery  to  the 
people,  and  yet,  because  the  Presidency  was  oflfered  him  at  the  hands  of  the 
money  power,  he  has  recently  told  us  that  the  only  sound  money  in  this 
country  is  gold! 

My  friends,  they  tell  us  that  McKinley's  nomination  was  produced  by 
spontaneous  patriotism  that  showed  itself  in  the  convention  that  presented  his 
name  to  the  country.  They  want  us  to  believe  that  the  people  arose  en  masse 
and  demanded  his  nomination.  Did  the  farmers  and  laboring  men  want  his 
nomination?  We  have  been  told  that  the  laboring  men  and  the  bankers  agreed 
on  that  occasion.     They  tell  us  that  McKinley's  nomination  was  the  result  of 


268  •     THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

a  spontaneous  uprising  throughout  the  continent.  Does  anybody  doubt  that 
the  gold  gamblers  and  brokers  of  Wall  street  and  Lombard  street  and  the  high 
protectionists  raised  one  million  dollars  or  more  to  secure  his  nomination?  The 
enthusiasm  that  was  shown  on  that  occasion  was  a  purchased  enthusiasm  and 
not  spontaneous.  The  great  Napoleon  of  France;  the  brilliant  son  of  Corsica, 
who  dazzled  the  world  with  his  military  genius  and  threatened  to  change  the 
map  of  Europe,  made  a  fatal  mistake.  He  made  a  mistake  when  he  left  the 
province  of  France  and  went  south  of  the  Pyrenees  into  the  provinces  of  Spain 
and  he  made  another  mistake  when  he  invaded  Russia  and  was  driven  from 
Moscow,  with  his  army  broken,  if  not  absolutely  destroyed.  What  is  to  become 
of  the  simulated  Napoleon;  the  Napoleon  of  Canton?  He  has  made  two 
mistakes  that  are  greater  and  more  fatal  than  the  mistakes  of  the  real  Napoleon. 
When  he  declared  that  the  only  way  prosperity  can  come  to  the  people  is  by 
doubling  taxation  on  the  articles  that  they  consume,  it  was  a  mistake.  Accord- 
ing to  the  logic  of  the  modern  Napoleon,  when  you  are  carrying  a  burden  the 
way  to  lighten  it  is  to  increase  it,  and  when  you  are  paying  an  average  tariff 
tax  of  $3.00  a  head,  the  way  to  lighten  it  is  to  decrease  the  volume  of  money 
and  double  the  volume  of  taxation.  He  made  another  mistake  when  he  told 
the  country  that  the  real  road  to  prosperity  lies  in  a  shrinking  volume  of  money 
and  the  establishment  of  the  single  gold  standard  as  a  permanent  policy — that 
was  a  mistake.  The  genuine  Napoleon  who  challenges  admiration,  notwith- 
standing his  mistakes,  made  one  that  cost  him  his  life.  It  cost  him  the  crown 
of  France;  it  cost  him  all  the  crowns  of  Europe,  I  might  say.  That  was  the 
mistake  made  at  Waterloo  when  he  met  Wellington  and  the  allied  forces. 
Wellington  had  fought  but  few  battles  up  to  that  time.  He  was  comparatively 
unknown.  He  had  not  dazzled  the  world  with  genius,  but  at  Waterloo,  the 
obscure  man  who  subsequently  became  the  "Iron  Duke"  of  England,  met  and 
overthrew  the  genuine  Napoleon,  who  was  banished  to  St.  Helena  and  there 
held  a  prisoner,  losing  his  life  in  solitude. 

Somewhere  in  this  broad  land  today,  either  in  the  East  or  in  the  South,  in 
the  North,  or  on  the  great  plains  of  the  Northwest,  will  be  found  a  -Wellington 
that  will  overcome  and  overthrow  the  modern  Napoleon  in  November  next,  and 
that  will  be  an  occasion  of  great  rejoicing  among  the  common  people. 

I  realize  that  the  party  stands  now  at  the  most  critical  period  of  its  history. 
Shall  it  live?  Shall  it  continue  to  advocate  the  great  principles  of  Populism  that 
are  as  eternal  as  the  rock-ribbed  earth  and  as  ancient  as  the  sun?  Shall  the 
party  continue  to  exist  for  the  protection  of  the  American  home,  not  only  the 
home  found  in  the  palace,  but  the  home  found  in  the  hovel  as  well?  Shall 
the  great  party  that  recognizes  no  distinction  between  men  and  women,  under 
a  just  system  of  government  survive?  Shall  it,  in  its  second  national  conven- 
tion be  destroyed,  or  shall  it  continue  to  stand  as  a  beacon  light  of  the  liberty- 
loving  people  throughout  the  globe?  My  fellow  citizens,  it  must  live.  It  shall 
live!  We  will  promulgate  a  platform  and  it  will  be  a  platform  that  will  embody 
the  best  Populistic  thought  of  the  country.  We  have  made  mistakes  before,  but 
they  will  be  corrected,  and  we  will  declare  to  the  world  that  on  that  platform  we 
must  succeed.  We  will  place  on  the  platform  as  candidates  for  President  and 
Vice-President,  men  who  will  accept  its  principles,  and  we  will  succeed. 

There  are  those  who  desire  us  to  promulgate  a  wild  platform  that  will 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION,  269 

be  the  subject  of  ridicule.  They  want  us  to  take  some  man  as  a  candidate  for 
President,  who  is  unfit  and  unacceptable  and  who  is  willing  to  run,  with  certain 
defeat  staring  him  in  the  face,  for  the  mere  empty  honor  of  being  a  candidate, 
and  they  will  cry  to  him  to  "keep  in  the  middle  of  the  road,"  but  they  are  our 
enemies,   and  not   our   friends. 

This  convention,  my  friends,  will  follow  its  deliberate  judgment;  its  cool 
judgment,  and  will  not  be  influenced  by  passion.  This  is  no  time  for  mere 
sentiment  and  no  time  to  give  way  to  passion.  He  who  is  moved  by  passion, 
is  a  failure  in  life.  The  man  who  is  controlled  by  high  intellect  and  a  keen 
sense  of  duty,  is  the  one  who  succeeds.  This  convention  will  place  in  nomina- 
tion a  Presidential  candidate  and  a  Vice-Presidential  candidate,  and  it  is  for  j'ou 
and  not  for  me  to  say  who  they  shall  be.  As  your  presiding  officer  it  is  my 
duty  to  recognize  the  rights  of  every  one  with  absolute  impartiality,  and  that 
will  be  done  as  far  as  I  am  capable  of  doing  it,  but  let  me  appeal  to  you  as  one 
who  sees  the  homes  of  his  country  in  peril;  as  one  who  sees  the  homes  of  the 
farmers  and  laborers  passing  into  the  hands  of  landlords  by  thousands;  as  one 
who  foresees  the  time  coming  not  far  distant,  unless  there  shall  be  a  change, 
when  there  will  be  a  few  landlords  and  many  peasants.  Let  me  appeal  to  you 
not  to  suflfer  sentiment  to  move  you  contrary  to  the  interests  of  your  country, 
your  family  and  your  God.  Take  into  account,  and  it  is  highly  itriportant,  what 
the  effect  will  be  of  the  election  in  November,  if  you  shall  put  into  the  field  a 
third  ticket.  That  is  a  serious  matter  for  you  to  consider.  There  is  where 
your  highest  judgment  and  your  greatest  patriotism  should  be  exercised. 

I  do  not  doubt  that  there  are  those  who  stand  in  the  lobbies  at  this  time, 
who  pray,  if  they  pray  at  all,  that  something  will  happen  to  this  convention,  by 
which  it  will  make  a  mistake.  Take  into  account,  and  weigh  well,  whether  we 
shall  unite  the  reform  forces  of  our  country  against  plutocracy.  Do  you  want 
McKinley?  Do  you  want  $263,000,000  more  of  gold  bonds  in  a  time  of  profound 
peace?  Is  it  not  suspicious  when  you  see  the  great  and  good  Deacon  Dana 
and  Herr  Most  standing  side  by  side  on  a  gold  platform?  Is  it  not  suspicious 
when  His  Excellency,  the  President,  says  that  on  the  result  of  this  convention 
he  will  or  will  not  become  a  candidate  for  a  third  term?  Is  it  not  suspicious 
when  the  chief  magistrate  of  71,000,000  people  causes  a  letter  to  be  written 
from  the  money  centers  of  the  country,  to  the  farmers  of  the  South  and  West, 
threatening  that  if  they  fail  to  vote  for  the  gold  standard,  their  money  supply  will 
be  taken  from  them?  Are  you  not  suspicious  of  a  man,  who,  but  a  few  years 
ago,  declared  that  gold  and  silver  were  money  of  equal  value,  and  yet  who  is 
today  the  outspoken  champion  of  the  single  gold  standard  and  accepts  the 
Presidential  nomination  on  a  platform  declaring  that  doctrine. 

Do  you  want  McKinley,  and  Government  bonds  and  national  bank  issues, 
and  high  taxation,  and  a  government  by  injunction?  Do  you  want  any  or  all 
of  these,  or  would  you  rather  have  an  enlarged  volume  of  money  and  greater 
prosperity?  Are  you  in  favor  of  an  income  tax,  or  would  you  rather  have  the 
chief  executive  appoint  a  few  more  Shirases  to  the  Supreme  Court  to  declare 
the  income  tax  unconstitutional,  or  do  you  want  a  President  who  is  in  favor 
of  lightening  the  burdens  of  the  people?  A  man  that  is  in  favor  of  Government 
ownership  of  railroads  and  telegraphs?  If  you  were  compelled  to  take  your 
choice  between  men  advocating  these  difTerent  principles  of  government,  which 


270  THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

would  you  take?  I  am  not  here  advocating  Mr.  Bryan's  nomination.  Do  not 
misunderstand  me  that  I  am  advocating  a  specific  choice  for  you  to  make.  It 
is  for  you  to  choose  and  not  for  me.  If  by  putting  a  third  ticket  in  the  field 
you  would  defeat  free  coinage;  defeat  a  withdrawal  of  the  issue  power  of  national 
banks;  defeat  Government  ownership  of  railroads,  telephones  and  telegraphs; 
defeat  an  income  tax  and  foist  gold  monometallism  and  high  taxation  upon  the 
people  for  a  generation  to  come,  which  would  you  do?  It  is  for  you  to  choose 
and  not  for  me,  but  you  should  choose  wisely,  as  doubtless  you  will. 

When  I  shall  go  back  to  the  splendid  commonwealth  that  has  so  signally 
honored  me  beyond  my  merits,  I  want  to  be  able  to  say  to  the  people  that  all 
the  great  doctrines  we  have  advocated  for  years,  have  been  made  possible  by 
your  action.  I  do  not  want  them  to  say  to  me  that  the  Populists  have  been 
advocates  of  reforms  when  they  could  not  be  accomplished,  but  when  the  first 
ray  of  light  appeared  and  the  people  were  looking  with  expectancy  and  with 
anxiety  for  relief,  the  party  was  not  equal  to  the  occasion;  that  it  was  stupid; 
it  was  blind;  it  kept  "in  the  middle  of  the  road,"  and  missed  the  golden  oppor- 
tunity. Invoking  your  considerate  judgment  and  again  thanking  you  for  the 
honor  conferred  on  me,  I  await  your  pleasure. 

In  view  of  the  contest  over  the  second  position,  it  was  decided  to 
nominate  the  candidate  for  Vice-President  first.  The  roll  of  the  States 
was  called  for  nominations,  and  Congressman  M.  W.  Howard,  of  Ala- 
bama, presented  the  name  of  Hon.  Thomas  E.  Watson,  of  Georgia, 
in  the  following  speech: 

Mr,  Howard's  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Convention:  We  have  often  seen  the 
storm  clouds  gather  and  rise  above  the  horizon;  we  have  heard  the  thunders 
roll  and  seen  the  lightning  flash,  and  then  the  silver  drops  began  to 
fall  on  the  earth,  and  after  a  while  the  storm  would  roll  away,  and  the  rainbow 
of  promise  would  come  out  in  the  sky.  Today,  and  during  this  convention,  we 
may  have  had  some  stormy  scenes,  my  friends,  but  I  am  glad  that  the  lightning 
flashes  have  been  harmless,  as  they  have  fallen  upon  the  crested  helmets  of  the 
true  knights  of  the  People's  party,  and  now  I  am  glad  that  the  storm  has  all 
passed  away,  and  that  the  rainbow  of  promise  spans  the  American  continent. 
My  friends,  another  storm  cloud  has  gathered,  and  a  man  has  come  forward 
in  our  dire  extremity  to  lead  the  people  out  of  bondage  into  the  land  of  freedom. 
I  am  glad  today,  my  friends,  that  he  has  been  nominated,  and  I  see  a  disposition 
here  that  we  will  stand  by  this  party  and  protect  it. 

My  friends,  the  grand  old  ship  of  the  People's  party  will  sail  on  until  it  will 
reach  the  harbor  of  safety.  I  want  now  the  privilege  of  naming  a  man  who 
will  be  one  of  the  pilots  on  board  of  this  ship  of  the  People's  party,  and  who 
will  steer  into  the  harbor  of  safety.  He  is  a  man  who  has  suffered  in  the  cause; 
a  man  who  has  sacrificed  his  money  and  his  time  for  its  good;  a  man  who  has 
borne  the  cross  and  who  should  wear  the  crown;  a  man  who  has  been  the 
friend  of  his  fellow-men  and  who  is  known  throughout  the  State  of  Georgia  and 
throughout  the  land  as  a  true  friend  of  his  fellow-men. 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.  271 

I  nominate  for  the  office  of  Vice-President  of  the  United  States  Thomas  E. 
Watson  of  Georgia. 

The  nomination  was  seconded  by  Hon.  J,  R.  Sovereign,  Hon. 
Jos.  A.  Johnson  of  California,  Hon.  Ignatius  Donnelly  of  Minnesota, 
Hon.  Frank  Doster  of  Kansas,  Hon.  George  Abbott  of  Nebraska, 
Messrs.  Murphy  of  Georgia,  Stockwell  of  Indiana,  A.  A.  Gunby  of 
Louisiana,  Taylor  of  Michigan,  Walton  of  Georgia,  Sitzes  of  Ohio,  and 
several  others  whose  names  I  have  not  been  able  to  secure. 

Hon.  Arthur  Sewall  was  placed  in  nomination  by  ex-Congressman 
Lafe  Pence,  of  New  York,  and  the  nomination  was  seconded  by  Hon. 
Thomas  Patterson  of  Colorado,  Senator  William  M.  Stewart  of  Ne- 
vada, Messrs.  W.  A.  Harris  of  Kansas,  Fogg  of  Michigan,  Donovan 
of  Montana,  and  Rev.  E.  Kent  of  the  District  of  Columbia. 

Hon.  A.  M.  Mimms,  of  Tennessee,  was  placed  in  nomination  by 
Captain  Burnham,  of  Tennessee,  and  the  nomination  was  seconded 
by  Mr.  Miller,  of  Illinois. 

Congressman  Harry  Skinner,  of  North  Carolina,  was  placed  in 
nomination  by  Col.  Bowman,  of  New  York,  and  the  nomination  was 
seconded  by  Mr.  Guthrie  of  North  Carolina,  and  Mr.  Rogers  of  Cali- 
fornia. 

Mr.  L.  H.  Weller,  of  Iowa,  presented  the  name  of  Hon.  Frank 
Burkett,  of  Mississippi,  and  the  nomination  was  seconded  by  Mr. 
Gore  of  Mississippi,  and  Mr.  Reeves  of  Montana. 

Prof.  L.  C.  Bateman,  of  Maine,  presented  to  the  convention  the 
name  of  Hon.  Mann  Page,  of  Virginia,  and  the  nomination  was  sec- 
onded by  Gen.  Field,  of  Virginia. 

As  the  roll  proceeded  it  was  evident  that  Mr.  Watson  was  far  in  the 
lead,  and  when  Mr.  Burkett  and  Mr.  Mimms  withdrew  from  the  con- 
test, Mr.  Watson  was  nominated  by  acclamation. 

In  deference  to  the  wishes  of  Mr.  Watson,  I  omit  a  biographical 
sketch  of  him. 

On  the  next  day  the  platform  was  reported  to  the  convention  by 
Gen.  James  B.  Weaver,  of  Iowa,  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Reso- 
lutions, and  was  adopted.    I  give  it  in  full  below: 

People's  Party  Platform. 

The  People's  party,  assembled  in  national  convention,  reaffirms  its  allegiance 
to  the  principles  declared  by  the  founders  of  the  Republic,  and  also  to  the 
fundamental  principles  of  just  government  as  enunciated  in  the  platform 
of  the  party  in  1892. 

We  recognize  that  through  the  connivance  of  the  present  and  preceding 
administrations  th«  country  has  reached  a  crisis  in  its  national  life  as  predicted 


272  THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

in  our  declarations  four  years  ago,  and  that  prompt  and  patriotic  action  is  the 
supreme  duty  of  the  hour.  We  realize  that  while  we  have  political  independence 
our  financial  and  industrial  independence  is  yet  to  be  attained,  by  restoring  to 
our  country  the  constitutional  control  and  exercise  of  the  functions  necessary 
to  a  people's  government,  which  functions  have  been  basely  surrendered  by 
our  public  servants  to  corporate  monopolies.  The  influence  of  European  money 
changers  has  been  more  potent  in  shaping  legislation  than  the  voice  of  the 
American  people.  Executive  power  and  patronage  have  been  used  to  corrupt 
our  Legislatures  and  defeat  the  will  of  the  people,  and  plutocracy  has  been 
enthroned  upon  the  ruins  of  democracy.  To  restore  the  Government  intended 
by  the  fathers  and  for  the  welfare  and  prosperity  of  this  and  future  generations, 
we  demand  the  establishment  of  an  economic  and  financial  system  which  shall 
make  us  masters  of  our  own  affairs,  and  independent  of  European  control  by 
the  adoption  of  the  following  declaration  of  principles: 

1.  We  demand  a  national  money,  safe  and  sound,  issued  by  the  general 
Government  only,  without  the  intervention  of  banks  of  issue,  to  be  a  full 
legal  tender  for  all  debts,  public  and  private;  a  just,  equitable,  and  efBcient 
means  of  distribution  direct  to  the  people  and  through  the  lawful  disbursements 
of  the  Government. 

2.  We  demand  the  free  and  unrestricted  coinage  of  silver  and  gold  at  the 
present  legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  without  waiting  for  the  consent  of  foreign 
nations. 

3.  We  demand  that  the  volume  of  circulating  medium  be  speedily  in- 
creased to  an  amount  sufficient  to  meet  the  demands  of  business  and  popula- 
tion, and  to  restore  the  just  level  of  prices  of  labor  and  production. 

4.  We  denounce  the  sale  of  bonds  and  the  increase  of  the  interest-bearing 
debt  made  by  the  present  administration  as  unnecessary  and  without  authority 
of  law,  and  demand  that  no  more  bonds  be  issued  except  by  specific  act  of 
Congress. 

5.  We  demand  such  legislation  as  will  prevent  the  demonetization  of  the 
lawful  money  of  the  United  States  by  private  contract. 

6.  We  demand  that  the  Government,  in  payment  of  its  obligations,  shall 
use  its  option  as  to  the  kind  of  lawful  money  in  which  they  are  to  be  paid, 
and  we  denounce  the  present  and  preceding  administrations  for  surrendering 
this  option  to  the  holders  of  Government  obligations. 

7.  We  demand  a  graduated  income  tax  to  the  end  that  aggregated  wealth 
shall  bear  its  just  proportion  of  taxation,  and  we  regard  the  recent  decision  of 
the  Supreme  Court  relative  to  the  income  tax  law  as  a  misinterpretation  of  the 
Constitution  and  an  invasion  of  the  rightful  powers  of  Congress  over  the 
subject  of  taxation. 

8.  We  demand  that  postal  savings  banks  be  established  by  the  Govern- 
ment for  the  safe  deposit  of  the  savings  of  the  people  and  to  facilitate  exchange. 

I.  Transportation  being  a  means  of  exchange  and  a  public  necessity,  the 
Government  should  own  and  operate  the  railroads  in  the  interest  of  the  people 
and  on  a  non-partisan  basis,  to  the  end  that  all  may  be  accorded  the  same 
treatment  in  transportation,  and  that  the  tyranny  and  political  power  now  exer- 
cised by  the  great  railroad  corporations,  which  result  in  the  impairment,  if 
not  the  destruction,  of  the  political  rights  and  personal  liberties  of  the  citizen. 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.  275 

may   be   destroyed.     Such   ownership   is   to   be  accompHshed   gradually,   in   a 
manner  consistent  with  sound  public  policy. 

2.  The  interest  of  the  United  States  in  the  public  highways,  built  with 
public  moneys,  and  the  proceeds  of  extensive  grants  of  land  to  the  Pacific 
railroads  should  never  be  alienated,  mortgaged  or  sold,  but  guarded  and  pro- 
tected for  the  general  welfare  as  provided  by  the  laws  organizing  such  rail- 
roads. The  foreclosure  of  existing  liens  of  the  United  States  on  these  roads 
should  at  once  follow  default  in  the  payment  thereof  by  the  debtor,  the  com- 
panies, and  at  the  foreclosure  sales  of  said  roads' the  Government  shall  purchase 
the  same  if  it  become  necessary  to  protect  its  interest  therein,  or  if  they  can 
be  purchased  at  a  reasonable  price;  and  the  Government  shall  operate  said 
railroads  as  public  highways  for  the  benefit  of  the  whole  people,  and  not  in  the 
interest  of  the  few,  under  suitable  provisions  for  protection  of  life  and  property, 
giving  to  all  transportation  interests  equal  privileges  and  equal  rates  for  fares 
and  freight. 

3.  We  denounce  the  present  infamous  schemes  for  refunding  these  debts, 
and  demand  that  the  laws  now  applicable  thereto  be  executed  and  administered 
according  to  their  true  intent  and  spirit. 

4.  The  telegraph,  like  the  postofTice  system,  being  a  necessity  for  the 
transmission  of  news,  should  be  owned  and  operated  by  the  Government  in 
the  interest  of  the  people. 

1.  The  true  policy  demands  that  national  and  State  legislation  shall  be  such 
as  will  ultimately  enable  every  prudent  and  industrious  citizen  to  secure  a  home, 
and  therefore  the  land  should  not  be  monopolized  for  speculative  purposes.  All 
lands  now  held  by  railroads  and  other  corporations  in  excess  of  their  actual 
needs  should  by  lawful  means  be  reclaimed  by  the  Government  and  held  for 
actual  settlers  only,  and  subject  to  the  right  of  every  human  being  to  acquire 
a  home  upon  the  soil;  and  private  land  monopoly,  as  well  as  alien  ownership, 
should  be  prohibited. 

2.  We  condemn  the  frauds  by  which  the  land  grants  to  the  Pacific  railroad 
companies  have,  through  the  connivance  of  the  Interior  Department,  robbed 
multitudes  of  actual  bona  fide  settlers  of  their  homes  and  miners  of  their 
claims,  and  we  demand  legislation  by  Congress  which  will  enforce  the  exemp- 
tion of  mineral  land  from  such  grants  after,  as  well  as  before,  patent. 

3.  We  demand  that  bona  fide  settlers  on  all  public  lands  be  granted  free 
homes  as  provided  in  the  national  homestead  law,  and  that  no  exception  be 
made  in  the  case  of  Indian  reservations  when  opened  for  settlement,  and  that 
all  lands  not  now  patented  come  under  this  demand. 

We  favor  a  system  of  direct  legislation  through  the  initiative  and  referen- 
dum under  proper  constitutional  safeguards. 

1.  We  demand  the  election  of  President,  Vice-President,  and  United  States 
Senators  by  a  direct  vote  of  the  people. 

2.  We  tender  to  the  patriotic  people  of  Cuba  our  deepest  sympathy  in  their 
heroic  struggle  for  political  freedom  and  independence,  and  we  believe  the 
time  has  come  when  the  United  States,  the  great  Republic  of  the  world,  should 
recognize  that  Cuba  is  and  of  right  ought  to  be  a  free  and  independent  State. 

3.  We  fa\'or  home  rule  in  the  Territories  and  the  District  of  Columbia, 
and  the  early  admission  of  Territories  as   States. 


276  THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

4.  All  public  salaries  should  be  made  to  correspond  to  the  price  of  labor 
and  its  products. 

5.  In  times  of  great  industrial  depression,  idle  labor  should  be  employed 
on  public  works  as  far  as  practicable. 

6.  The  arbitrary  course  of  the  courts  in  assuming  to  imprison  citizens  for 
indirect  contempt,  and  ruling  by  injunction,  should  be  prevented  by  proper 
legislation. 

7.  We  favor  just  pensions  for  our  disabled  Union  soldiers. 

8.  Believing  that  the  elective  franchise  and  an  untrammeled  ballot  are 
essential  to  a  government  of,  for,  and  by  the  people,  the  People's  party  condemn 
the  wholesale  system  of  disfranchisement  adopted  in  some  of  the  States  as  un- 
republican  and  un-democratic,  and  we  declare  it  to  be  the  duty  of  the  several 
State  Legislatures  to  take  such  action  as  will  secure  a  full,  free,  and  fair  ballot 
and  an  honest  count. 

9.  While  the  foregoing  propositions  constitute  the  platform  upon  which 
our  party  stands,  and  for  the  vindication  of  which  its  organization  will  be 
maintained,  we  recognize  that  the  great  and  pressing  issue  of  the  pending  cam- 
paign upon  which  the  present  Presidential  election  will  turn  is  the  financial 
question,  and  upon  this  great  and  specific  issue  between  the  parties  we  cordially 
invite  the  aid  and  co-operation  of  all  organizations  and  citizens  agreeing  with 
us  upon  this  vital  question. 

The  convention  then  proceeded  to  the  nomination  of  a  candidate 
for  the  Presidency.  My  name  was  placed  before  the  convention  by 
Gen.  Weaver,  who  spoke  as  follows: 

Mr,  Weaver*s  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman:  I  arise  before  you  this  morning,  facing  the  most  critical 
period  that  has  ever  occurred  in  the  history  of  the  PopuHst  party.  I  know 
that  I  have  in  my  heart  not  one  aspiration  to  do  anything  in  this  con- 
vention or  to  say  one  word  in  this  presence  that  would  militate  against  the 
growth  and  strength,  security  and  purpose  of  the  Populist  party.  I  have 
but  two  aspirations  in  connection  with  that  party.  The  first  is  incorporated 
with  my  life  work.  It  is  to. preserve  untarnished  and  unsullied  to  the  Ameri- 
can people  the  great  principles  that  we  have  contended  for  for  the  last 
twenty  years.  My  second  purpose  is  to  preserve  the  organization  for  pres- 
ent and  future  usefulness  in  every  part  of  this  Union. 

You  have  all  read  the  papers  this  morning;  you  have  all  read  the  manly 
dispatch  from  the  Democratic  nominee  for  the  presidency,  William  J.  Bryan. 
No  man  could  have  done  less  and  be  a  man.  His  manly  attitude  concern- 
ing the  action  of  this  convention  we  must  all  respect.  But,  my  fellow  citizens, 
this  question  has  reached  a  point  where  neither  Mr.  Bryan  nor  his  personal 
friends  have  any  right  whatever  to  say  what  the  action  of  this  convention 
shall  be.     This  is  a  greater  question  than  the  personality  of  its  candidates. 

After  your  action  last  night,  after  I  had  read  the  telegrams  from  Mr. 
Bryan,  I  utterly  refused,  and  I  here  and  now  utterly  refuse,  to  confer  either 
with  Mr.  Bryan  or  Mr.  Jones  as  to  who  shall  be  the  nominee  of  this  con- 
vention. That  is  a  matter  that  we  have  a  right  to  determine  for  ourselves. 
It  is  the  reKef  of  70,000,000  people  that  is  at  stake. 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.  277 

I  am  here  to  do  but  one  thing  and  to  ask  the  consideration  and  the 
attention  of  this  convention  to  that  one  thing.  I  know  that  I  am  proceeding 
upon  right  lines.  You  know  how  long  I  have  fought  in  your  behalf;  listen 
now  to  what  I  have  to  say.  I  bore  your  standard  (I  know  I  was  unde- 
serving) first,  sixteen  years  ago,  in  1880,  and  twelve  years  afterward,  un- 
solicited, you  made  me  your  standard  bearer  in  1892.  I  did  my  best.  I 
did  all  I  could  do  with  the  means  at  my  command  to  support  our  prin- 
ciples among  the  people.  Now  I  stand  here  in  the  crucial  juncture  of  our 
party's  history,  and  I  shall  proceed  to  deliver  my  convictions  deliberately. 

In  that  midnight  discussion  between  Brutus  and  Cassius  concerning  the 
contemplated  battle  at  Philippi,  Brutus  urged  that  their  cause  was  ripe, 
their  legions  brimful,  at  the  height,  and  ready  to  decline.     Said  he; 

There  is  a  tide  in  the  affairs  of  men, 

Which,  taken  at  the  flood,  leads  on  to  fortune; 

Omitted,  all  the  voyage  of  their  life 

Is  bound  in  shadows  and  in  misery. 

And  then,  in  dramatic  climax,  he  exclaimed: 

On  such  a  full  sea  are  we  now  afloat. 

And  we  must  take  the  current  when  It  serves. 

Or  lose  our  ventures. 

For  twenty  years  we  have  been  pleading  with  the  people  to  espouse 
the  sacred  cause  which  is  at  stake  in  this  campaign.  We  have  constantly 
urged  through  good  and  through  evil  report  that  our  principles  were  more 
important  than  party  associations;  were  above  all  considerations  of  private 
fortune  or  the  petty  and  feverish  ambitions  of  men.  We  have  thus  far 
suited  our  action  to  our  words.  Through  five  presidential  campaigns,  stretch- 
ing from  1876  to  1892,  you  correctly  estimated  the  purposes  of  old  party 
managers,  and  events  have  sustained  every  specification  in  your  indictment 
against  them.  Millions  of  honest  men  within  old  party  ranks  were  deceived, 
lured  into  ambush  and  betrayed.  But  not  a  single  one  of  your  pickets  has 
ever  been  caught  napping  or  been  taken  by  surprise.  To  your  devoted  ef- 
forts is  largely  due  the  revival  of  economic  learning  in  this  country,  which 
has  enabled  the  Democratic  party  to  assume  its  present  admirable  attitude. 
Your  work  now  promises  much  to  mankind,  and  is  about  to  break  forth  in 
complete  victory  for  the  industrial  masses.  Though  oft  repulsed  by  the  mul- 
titude, whom  we  would  have  liberated,  though  crucified  in  return  for  our 
kindness,  yet  through  it  all  we  have  steadily  confided  in  the  righteousness 
of  our  cause  and  the  final  good  sense  of  the  people.  We  still  believe 
that  this  nation  has  a  mission  to  perform  which  bad  men  will  not  be  per- 
mitted to  destroy,  and  recent  events  indicate  that  the  nineteenth  century  is 
not,  after  all,  to  close  with  the  friends  of  freedom  despondent  in  the  western 
hemisphere. 

This  country  has  recently  witnessed  a  new  Pentecost,  and  received  an- 
other baptism  of  fire.  The  recent  convention  at  Chicago  sounded  a  bugle 
call  for  union  which  can  neither  be  misunderstood  nor  go  unheeded.  In  its 
patriotic  utterances  and  action  it  swept  away  all  middle  ground,  and  opened 
the  road  to  a  formidable  organic  alliance.  They  not  only  made  union  possi- 
ble— thank  heaven,  they  have  rendered  it  inevitable. 


278  THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION. 

From  the  very  beginning  our  organization  has  made  party  fealty  sub- 
ordinate to  principle.  We  will  not  here  reverse  ourselves  and  refuse  to  accept 
victory  now  so  easily  within  our  reach.  We  will  not  refuse  the  proffered  as- 
sistance of  at  least  3,000,000  free  silver  Democrats,  and  not  less  than  1,000,000 
free  silver  Republicans,  simply  because  they  have  shown  the  good  sense  to 
come  with  an  organized  army  fully  equipped  and  manned  for  battle.  Let 
them  have  their  own  divisions  and  army  corps.  The  field  of  glory  is  open 
to  all  competitors  who  are  fighting  for  the  same  principles. 

The  Populists  have  already  shown  their  prowess  in  many  engagements 
during  twenty  years  of  struggle.  If  our  allies  can  strike  sturdier  blows  at 
plutocracy  than  can  we;  if  they  can  scale  the  battlements  of  the  gold  power 
more  gallantly  than  our  old  veterans,  and  are  able  to  plant  their  colors  one 
foot  nearer  the  citadel  of  the  enemy  than  we  can  ourselves,  let  every  Populist 
cheer  and  support  them  in  their  heroic  work.  We  will  all  march  under 
the  same  flag,  keep  step  to  the  same  music,  face  the  same  foe,  share  in,  and 
shout  over,  the  same  triumph. 

We  cannot  be  mistaken  concerning  the  real  issue  involved  in  the  struggle 
of  the  present  year.  It  is  between  the  gold  standard,  gold  bonds  and  bank 
currency  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  bimetallic  standard,  no  bonds,  and  gov- 
ernment currency  on  the  other.  The  people  are  asked  to  choose  between 
enforced  idleness,  destitution,  debt,  bankruptcy  and  despair  on  the  one  side, 
and  an  open  door  of  opportunity  under  just  laws  and  normal  conditions 
on  the  other.  The  situation  presents  the  mightiest  civic  question  that  ever 
convulsed  a  civilized  nation.  The  conflict  can  neither  be  postponed  nor 
avoided.  In  the  name  of  the  suffering  people,  I  affirm  that  this  is  no  time 
for  dissensions  or  party  divisions.  The  supreme  hour  for  action  has  ar- 
rived. If  we  would  be  victorious  we  must  make  common  cause  with  the 
heroic  men  who  dominated  the  Chicago  convention.  No  other  course  is 
either  prudent  or  desirable.  We  are  not  asked  to  abandon  our  party,  nor 
would  it  be  wise  to  do  so.  If  it  is  to  be  preserved  we  will,  in  my  judg- 
ment, be  compelled  to  take  the  course  which  I  am  about  to  indicate.  The 
silver  Democrats  have  lined  up  as  an  organization.  Now  let  the  Populists, 
free  silver  Republicans,  and  the  American  silver  party  do  likewise.  Form 
an  embattled  square — impenetrable  to  the  assaults  of  the  confederated  gold 
power. 

After  due  consideration,  in  which  I  have  fully  canvassed  every  possible 
phase  of  the  subject,  I  have  failed  to  find  a  single  good  reason  to  justify  us  in 
placing  a  third  ticket  in  the  field.  The  exigencies  of  the  hour  imperatively 
demand  that  there  shall  be  but  one.  I  would  not  endorse  the  distinguished 
gentleman  named  at  Chicago.  I  would  nominate  him  outright,  and  make 
him  our  own,  and  then  share  justly  and  rightfully  in  his  election.  The 
situation  is  a  striking  verification  of  the  old  adage  that  "The  path  of  duty  is 
the  path  of  safety."  Take  this  course,  and  all  opposition  will  practically  dis- 
appear in  the  Southern  and  Western  states,  and  we  can  then  turn  our  at- 
tention to  other  parts  of  the  field.  Take  any  other,  and  you  endanger  the 
entire   situation   and   strengthen   the   arm   of   our   common   adversary. 

If  you  allow  the  present  happy  juncture  to  pass,  all  the  heroic  work  of 
twenty  years  will  be  thrown  to  the  winds.     Our  guiding  hand  will  disappear 


THE  POPULIST  CONVENTION.  279 

in  the  momentous  conflict  just  when  it  should  be  stretched  forth  to  steady 
the  ark  of  our  covenant.  We  would  prove  to  the  world  that  we  are  de- 
void of  capacity  to  grasp  great  opportunities,  and  lacking  in  strength  to 
grapple  with  prodigious  emergencies.  The  people  have  a  gallant  champion 
in  the  field,  who  is  leading  a  revolt  against  the  plutocracy  of  Christendom. 
Every  oppressor,  every  plutocrat,  in  two  hemispheres  has  turned  his  guns 
upon  him.  The  subsidized  organs  have  openly  proclaimed  that  he  must 
be  crushed  by  any  means  and  at  whatever  cost.  The  confederated  monopolies 
have  laid  aside  their  parties  and  their  politics  and  are  marching  in  hot  haste 
against  him.  Let  us  signal  to  him  to  hold  the  fort — that  we  are  coming — 
and  then  hasten  to  his  relief.  Gentlemen,  I  want  to  say  to  you  in  all  earnest- 
ness, that,  assailed  as  is  this  gallant  knight  by  the  sleuth  hounds  of  the 
money  power  of  the  world,  you  may  deliberate  here  as  long  as  you  please, 
but  you  cannot  prevent  the  people  from  rushing  to  the  support  of  their 
recognized  defender  and  leader.  If  you  will  not  say  the  word,  they  will 
break  over  all  restraints  and  go  themselves,  leaders  or  no  leaders,  and  may 
God  bless  them  for  so  doing. 

Therefore,  in  obedience  to  my  highest  conception  of  duty,  with  the 
solemn  conviction  that  I  am  right,  I  place  in  nomination  for  the  presidency 
of  the  United  States  a  distinguished  gentleman,  who,  let  it  be  remembered, 
has  already  been  three  times  endorsed  by  the  Populist  party  of  his  own 
State — once  for  Representative  in  Congress;  once  for  United  States  Senator, 
and  only  last  week  for  the  Presidency.  I  name  that  matchless  champion  of 
the  people,  that  intrepid  foe  of  corporate  greed,  that  splendid  young  states- 
man— William  J.  Bryan,  of  Nebraska. 

The  nomination  was  seconded  by  Gen,  Field  of  Virginia,  Hons, 
W.  H.  Claggett  of  Idaho,  H.  E.  Taubeneck  of  Illinois,  Jerry  Simpson 
of  Kansas,  Ignatius  Donnelly  of  Minnesota,  and  T.  V.  Cator  of  Cali- 
fornia, Judges  J.  K.  Hines  of  Georgia,  W.  L.  Green  of  Nebraska,  and 
A.  J.  Plowman  of  South  Dakota,  Mrs.  Mary  E.  Lease  of  Kansas,  and 
Messrs.  Cobb  of  Alabama,  Brown  of  Massachusetts,  Greece  of  Michi- 
gan, Smith  of  Montana,  Kitchin  of  North  Carolina,  Matthews  of  New 
York,  Sites  of  Ohio,  McDowell  of  Tennessee,  Beverly  of  Virginia,  Mc- 
Guire  of  Washington,  Brown  of  Wyoming,  Crosby  of  Missouri,  Kent 
of  District  of  Columbia,  and  others  whose  names  I  have  not  been  able 
to  ascertain. 

The  name  of  Col.  S.  F.  Norton,  of  Illinois,  was  presented  to  the 
convention  by  Henry  G.  Call,  of  New  York,  and  the  nomination  was 
seconded  by  James  H,  Davis,  of  Texas,  and  a  delegate  from  West  Vir- 
ginia.   The  ballot  resulted  in  1042  for  me  and  340  for  Mr.  Norton. 

I  may  add  here  that  Mr.  Norton  during  the  campaign  gave  active 
support  to  the  fusion  electors  and  spoke  in  several  States. 


280  THE  TRIPLE  DEMAND. 


^     ctc^.^^^    ^     /^^     "^^    "^^ 


THE  TRIPLE  DEMAND.  281 


in, 
i4-jL    oCt^^^^i^^u.  '^  ^^^"^  """-^  ^*^^- 

CHAPTER  XVI. 


THE  TRIPLE  DEMAND. 

1HAVE  called  special  attention  to  the  platforms  which  demanded 
the  opening  of  the  mints  of  the  United  States  to  the  free  and  un- 
limited coinage  of  silver  at  i6  to  i,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or 
consent  of  any  other  nation,  because  they  mark  an  epoch  in  the  fight 
for  the  restoration  of  bimetallism. 

As  soon  as  the  fact  of  the  demonetization  of  silver  by  this  country 
was  discovered,  agitation  for  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  began,  and 
for  years  no  political  party  had  the  temerity  to  adopt  a  platform  defend- 
ing the  favoritism  shown  to  gold  by  the  act  of  1873,  but  the  financiers, 
by  keeping  control  of  at  least  one  branch  of  the  Government,  were 


282  THE  TRIPLE  DEMAND. 

able  to  prevent  the  enactment  of  any  free  coinage  legislation.  Fighting 
all  the  time  under  cover,  they  compelled  the  bimetalhsts  to  compromise 
on  the  Bland-Allison  act  in  1878,  and  then  began  to  scheme  for  the 
repeal  of  that  act.  In  1884,  the  Democrats  in  National  Convention 
said:  "We  believe  in  honest  money,  the  gold  and  silver  coinage  of 
the  Constitution,  and  a  circulating  medium  convertible  into  such 
money  without  loss;"  but  Mr.  Cleveland,  after  his  election  and  before 
the  beginning  of  his  administration,  expressed  a  desire  for  the  sus- 
pension of  the  Bland-Allison  act,  and  prophesied  financial  catastrophe 
unless  this  was  done.  The  silver  sentiment  was  strong  enough,  how- 
ever, to  prevent  the  carrying  out  of  the  President's  recommendation. 
In  1888,  the  Democrats  reiterated  their  declaration  of  1884,  while  the 
Republicans  denounced  the  Democratic  administration  for  its  effort 
to  demonetize  silver.  The  money  question  did  not,  however,  enter 
prominently  into  either  the  campaign  of  1884  or  the  campaign  of 
1888. 

By  1890,  the  Senate,  which  in  1878  was  opposed  to  free  silver,  had 
become  its  champion,  while  the  House  by  this  time  contained  a  ma- 
jority against  the  white  metal.  The  Sherman  act  was  the  result  of 
another  compromise.  It  was  voted  for  by  many  advocates  of  free  coin- 
age who  believed  that  it  would  create  a  demand  for  all  the  surplus 
silver,  and  thus  restore  the  bullion  price  to  $1.29  per  ounce.  The 
immediate  effect  was  to  raise  silver  to  about  $1.20  an  ounce,  but  as 
soon  as  it  became  apparent  that  the  law  did  not  absorb  all  the  silver 
upon  the  market,  the  price  of  silver  bullion  began  to  decline. 

By  1892,  the  silver  Republicans  had  commenced  to  assert  them- 
selves, and  they  succeeded  in  securing  in  the  Minneapolis  platform 
a  sentence  declaring  that  "the  American  people,  from  tradition  and  in- 
terest, favor  bimetallism."  In  the  Democratic  party,  also,  the  silver 
sentiment  was  growing,  but  the  friends  of  Mr.  Cleveland,  controlling 
the  convention  by  a  large  majority,  succeeded  in  evading  an  express 
declaration  in  favor  of  free  coinage.    The  platform  read : 

We  hold  to  the  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  the  standard  money  of  the 
country,  and  to  the  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  without  discrimination 
against  either  metal  or  charge  for  coinage. 

There  were  qualifying  words,  which  in  the  East  were  construed  to 
support  the  gold  standard,  while  the  words  above  quoted  were  em- 
phasized in  the  West  and  South.  Subsequent  events,  in  my  judgment, 
justify  the  conclusion  that  Mr.  Cleveland  was,  before  his  election,  per- 
sonally committed  to  unconditional  repeal,  although  a  reasonable  con- 


/^/flJ/cU<-^^-'^-<->-^ 


THE  TRIPLE  DEMAND.  285 

struction  of  the  platform  would  make  the  restoration  of  the  coinage 
of  gold  and  silver  on  equal  terms  a  necessary  part  of  an  act  repeaUng 
the  Sherman  law.  As  soon  as  the  election  was  over,  the  scheme  to 
secure  unconditional  repeal  was  put  on  foot.  In  fact,  an  attempt  was 
made  to  secure  it  during  the  closing  session  of  the  Fifty-second  Con- 
gress. After  1892,  the  well  settled  terms  used  in  the  discussion  of  the 
silver  question  began  to  be  distorted.  The  word  "bimetalHsm"  began 
to  be  used  in  a  sense  entirely  unknown  in  previous  years.  Men 
claimed  to  be  bimetallists,  but  supported  every  measure  suggested  by 
the  advocates  of  the  gold  standard.  In  a  speech  made  in  Ohio,  I  think 
in  1895,  Senator  Sherman  used  language  something  like  this  (I  read  it 
in  the  press  dispatches  at  the  time  and  quote  from  memory) : 

The  parity  between  gold  and  silver  can  only  be  maintained  by  the  use  of 
gold  as  the  standard,  with  silver  coined  in"  limited  quantities  as  a  limited  legal 
tender.    This  can  properly  be  called  bimetallism. 

This  definition  of  bimetallism  has,  within  the  last  four  years,  be- 
come quite  common  among  those  who  favor  the  gold  standard,  but  are 
not  willing  to  be  known  as  monometallists.  Bimetallism  means  two- 
metallism,  just  as  certainly  as  the  word  biped  means  an  ani- 
mal with  two  feet.  It  means  the  use  of  two  metals  as  stand- 
ard money,  and  to  be  standard  money  they  must  be  treated 
alike.  If  to  use  gold  as  a  standard,  with  silver  coined  in 
limited  quantities  as  a  limited  legal  tender,  is  bimetallism,  then 
England  now  has  bimetallism.  If  that  system  can  properly  be 
called  bimetallism,  then  the  use  of  copper  in  limited  quantities  as 
a  limited  legal  tender  along  with  such  a  system  would  constitute  tri- 
metallism.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  absurdity  of  Mr,  Sherman's  defini- 
tion must  be  apparent  to  anyone  who  will  give  the  subject  a  moment's 
consideration.  It  was  the  attempt  of  the  opponents  of  free  coinage 
to  misconstrue  the  terms  formerly  used,  that  led  to  the  declaration  for 
a  specific  ratio.  Then,  too,  many  insisted  upon  calling  themselves 
bimetallists  who  were  unwilling  to  vote  for  bimetallism  without  an  in- 
ternational agreement.  This  made  it  necessary  to  adopt  some  means 
of  distinguishing  between  independent  bimetallists  and  international 
bimetallists.  The  Populists,  in  1892,  declared  for  free  coinage  at  16  to  i, 
but  that  declaration  was  not  sufficient  in  1896,  because  there  were 
plenty  of  gold  men  who  would  have  subscribed  to  it  with  the  mental 
reservation,  "whenever  the  rest  of  the  world  will  join  with  us." 

When  the  silver  Democrats  organized  for  the  purpose  of  capturing 
the  National  Convention  they  announced  their  intention  to  secure, 

16 


286  THE  TRIPLE  DEMAND. 

if  possible,  a  platform  which  would  avoid  ambiguous  words  and  leave 
nothing  for  misinterpretation,  and  therefore  the  State  Conventions 
controlled  by  the  silver  Democrats  instructed  their  delegates  to  vote  for 
a  plank  declaring,  in  substance,  for  free  coinage,  for  unlimited  coinage, 
for  coinage  at  i6  to  i,  and  for  such  coinage  without  waiting  for  the  aid 
or  consent  of  any  other  nation.  This  platform  spread  over  the  country 
until  it  became  a  part  of  the  creed  of  the  silver  advocates.  The  Demo- 
cratic National  Convention  adopted  it,  the  convention  of  the  National 
Silver  party  adopted  it,  and  the  Populist  party  adopted  it.  Thus  three 
conventions  united  in  this  demand  for  an  American  financial  policy 
for  the  American  people. 

It  was  several  years  before  the  colonists  could  give  effect  to  their 
Declaration  of  Independence ;  it  may  be  several  years  before  this  nation 
can,  through  actual  legislation,  assert  its  financial  independence.  But, 
in  my  judgment,  the  financial  independence  of  the  United  States  is  as 
certain  to  be  secured  as  was  political  independence. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 


THREE.  NATIONAL  COMMITTEES. 

THE  campaign  for  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  was  carried  on 
by  three  National  Committees.     I  give  below  the  name  and 
address  of  each  committeeman  for  the  benefit  of  those  who 
may  desire  to  refer  to  the  matter  hereafter. 

DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL  COMMITTEE. 
Chairman,  James  K.  Jones,  Washington,  Ark.;  Secretary,  C.  A. 
Walsh,  Ottumwa,  la. ;  Treasurer,  William  P.  St.  John,  New  York  City. 

Campaign  Committee. 
Daniel  J.  Campau,  Chairman,  Detroit,  Mich.;  John  R.  McLean, 
Cincinnati,  O.;  William  J.  Stone,  Jefferson  City,  Mo.;  J.  G.  Johnson, 
Peabody,  Kas. ;  Thomas  Gahan,  Chicago,  111.;  Clark  Howell,  Jr.,  At- 
lanta, Ga,;  William  A.  Clark,  Butte,  Mont.;  James  Kerr, Clearfield,  Pa.; 
Secretary,  Frank  Hosford,  Mich. 

Executive  Committee* 
James  K.  Jones,  Chairman;  Henry  D.  Clayton,  Eufaula,  Ala. 
Thomas  C.  McRae,  Prescott,  Ark.;  J.  J.  Dwyer,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 
Adair  Wilson,   Durango,   Col.;   Richard   R.    Kenney,   Dover,   Del. 
Samuel  Pasco,  Monticello,  Fla.;  George  Ainslie,  Boise  City,  Idaho 
John  G.  Shanklin,  Evansville,  Ind.;  C.  A.  Walsh,  Ottumwa,  la.;  Urey 
Woodson,  Owensboro,  Ky. ;  N.  C.  Blanchard,  Shreveport,  La.;  Ar- 
thur P.  Gorman,  Laurel,  Md.;  D.  J.  Campau,  Detroit,  Mich.;  Wil- 
liam J.  Stone,  Jefferson  City,  Mo.;  W.  H.  Thompson,  Grand  Island, 
Neb.;  James  Smith,  Jr.,  Newark,  N.  J.;  Josephus  Daniel,  Raleigh, 
N.  C;  William  C.  Leistikow,  Grafton,  N.  D.;  B.  R.  Tillman,  Trenton, 
S.  C;  James  M.  Head,  Nashville,  Tenn.;  Peter  J.  Otey,  Lynchburg, 
Va. ;  E.  C.  Wall,  Milwaukee,  Wis. ;  Marcus  A.  Smith,  Phoenix,  Ariz. ; 
Lawrence  Gardner,  Washington,  D.  C. ;  Thomas  Marcum,  Muscogee, 
I.  T. ;  Secretary,  Thomas  O.  Towles,  Jefferson  City,  Mo. 

Remaining  Members  of  National  Committee. 
Alexander  Troop,  New  Haven,  Conn. ;  Seth  C.  Gordon,  Portland, 
Me.;  John  W.  Corcoran,  Boston,  Mass.;  T.  D.  O'Brien,  St.  Paul, 

287 


288  THREE  NA  TIONAL  COMMITTEES. 

Minn.;  W.  V.  Sullivan,  Oxford,  Miss.;  John  J.  McHatton,  Butte  City, 
Mont.;  Clayton  Belknap,  Virginia  City,  Nev.;  True  L.  Norris,  Ports- 
mouth, N.  H.;  Philip  D.  Baker,  Bridgeton,  N.  J.;  Frank  Campbell, 
Bath,  N.  Y.;  I.  P.  Baker,  Bismarck,  N.  D.;  J.  H.  Townsend,  Dallas, 
Ore.;  William  F.  Harrity,  Philadelphia,  Pa.;  Richard  B.  Comstock, 
Providence,  R.  I.;  James  M.  Woods,  Rapid  City,  S.  D.;  James  C. 
Dudley,  Paris,  Tex.;  A.  W.  McCune,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah.;  Bradley 
B.  Smalley,  Burlington,  Vt.;  William  H.  White,  Seattle,  Wash.;  John 
T.  McGraw,  Grafton,  W,  Va.;  William  H.  HoUiday,  Laramie,  Wyo.; 
Charles  D.  Rogers,  Sitka,  Alaska;  F.  A.  Manzanaras,  East  Las  Vegas, 
N.  M.;  Whit  M.  Grant,  Oklahoma,  O.  T. 

PEOPLE^S  PARTY  NATIONAL  COMMITTEE. 

Chairman,  Marion  Butler,  Raleigh,  N.  C;  Secretary,  J.  A.  Edger- 
ton,  Lincoln,  Neb.;  Treasurer,  M.  C.  Rankin,  Terre  Haute,  Ind. 

Executive  Cimmittee. 

The    chairman,    secretary    and    treasurer,    together    with    J.    R. 

Sovereign,   Sulphur  Springs,   Ark.;   George   F.   Washburn,   Boston, 

Mass.;    John    W.    Breidenthal,    Topeka,    Kas.;    Dr.    C.    F.    Taylor, 

Philadelphia,  Pa. ;  H.  W.  Reed,  Brunswick,  Ga. ;  John  S.  Dore,  Fresno, 

Cal. 

Remaining  Members  of  the  National  Committee* 

R.  F.  Kolb,  Birmingham,  Ala.;  R.  H.  Seymor,  Livingston,  Ala.; 

K.  S.  Woodruff,  Anniston,  Ala.;  A.  W.  Files,  Little  Rock,  Ark.;  J. 

O.  A.  Bush,  Prescott,  Ark.;  E.  M.  Hamilton,  Los  Angeles,   Cal.; 

F.  Houghton,  Corning,  Cal.;  John  C.  Bell,  Montrose,  Col.;  H.  S. 

Tompkins,   Colorado;  J.    H.   Voorhees,   Pueblo,   Col.;   William   W. 

Wheeler,   Meriden,   Conn.;   Dr.  Joshua  Perkins,   Danielson,   Conn.; 

H.  C.  Baldwin,  Naugatuck,  Conn.;  Benjamin  Lundy,  Farmington, 

Del.;  Charles  Beadenkopf,  Wilmington,    Del.;    George    L.    Morris, 

Wilmington,  Del. ;  S.  S.  Harvey,  Quintette,  Fla. ;  F.  H.  Lytle,  Stanton, 

Fla.;  J.  F.  Rhoads,  Jacksonville,  Fla.;  J.  L.  Sibley,  Marietta,  Ga.; 

Cary  J.  Thornton,  Columbus,  Ga.;  J.  H.  Anderson,  Weiser,  Idaho; 

A.     J.     Cook,     Payette,     Idaho;     Ed.     Boyce,      Wallace,      Idaho; 

H.     E.     Taubeneck,     Marshall,   III;    J.   D.    Hess,    Pittsfield,    III; 

Eugene     Smith,     Chicago,     III;     Joshua     Strange,     Arcana,     Ind.; 

D.     H.     Fernandes,     Anderson,      Ind.;      W.     S.     Auston,     New 

Albany,  Ind.;  W.  H.  Robb,  Creston,  la.;  S.  B.  Crane,  Des  Moines, 

la.;  J.  E.  Anderson,  Forest  City,  la.;  J.  M.  Allen,  Erie,  Kas.;  W.  D. 

Vincent,  Clay  Center,  Kas.;  A.  H.  Cardin,  Marion,  Ky.;  John  G.  Blair, 


THREE  NATIONAL  COMMITTEES.  289 

Carlisle,  Ky.;  W.  B.  Bridgeford,  Frankfort,  Ky.;  A.  A.  Gunby,  Mon- 
roe, La.;  J.  T.  Howell,  Baton  Rouge,  La.;  E.  C.  Dillon,  Many,  La.; 
L.  C.  Bateman,  Auburn,  Me.;  L.  W.  Smith,  Vinalhauen,  Me.;  Henry 
Betts,  Ellsworth,  Ale. ;  C.  M.  Kemp,  Baltimore,  Md. ;  Hiram  Vrooman, 
Baltimore,  Md.;  T.  Canfield  Jenkins,  Pomonkey,  Md.;  E.  Gerry 
Brown,  Brockton,  Mass.;  P.  J.  Gardener,  Danvers,  Mass.;  John  O. 
Zable,  Petersburg,  Mich.;  James  E.  McBride,  Grand  Rapids,  Mich.; 
Benjamin  Colvin,  St.  Charles,  Mich.;  W.  R.  Dobbyn,  Minneapolis, 
Minn.;  Thomas  J.  Meighen,  Forestville,  Minn.;  J.  M.  Bowler,  Bird 
Island,  Minn.  ;  R.  K.  Prewitt,  Ackerman,  Miss.;  Frank  Burkitt, 
Okolona,  Miss.;  T.  L.  McGeehee,  Summit,  Miss.;  P.  J.  Dixon,  Chilli- 
cothe.  Mo.;  J.  H.  Hillis,  McFall,  Mo.;  Dr.  DeWitt  Eskew,  Poplar 
Bluffs,  Mo. ;  A.  E.  Spriggs,  Townsend,  Mont. ;  M.  L.  Stewart,  Mason, 
Mont. ;  Mrs.  Ella  K.  Haskell,  Helena,  Mont. ;  William  V.  Allen,  Mad- 
ison, Neb.;  James  H.  Edmisten,  Lincoln,  Neb.;  D.  Clem  Deaver, 
Omaha,  Neb.;  J.  B.  McCullough,  Reno,  Nev.;  C.  E.  Allen,  Eureka, 
Nev. ;  J.  C.  Deethe,  Keith,  Nev.;  Darrance  B.  Currier,  Hanover,  N. 
H.;  G.  J.  Greenlief,  Portsmouth,  N.  H.;  George  D.  Epps,  Francis- 
town,  N.  H.;  J.  R.  Buchanan,  Newark,  N.  J.;  John  Wilcox,  Bridge- 
ton,  N.  J.;  Eltweed  Pomeroy,  Newark,  N.  J.;  C.  R.  White,  Miller 
Corners,  N.  Y.;  Lafe  Pence,  New  York  City;  L.  J.  McParlin,  Lockport, 
N.  Y.;  J.  T.  Garrett,  Henderson,  N.  C;  A.  L.  Ramsey,  Raleigh,  N.  C; 
Walter  Muir,  Hunton,  N.  D.;  Dr.  William  A.  Bentley,  Bismarck,  N. 
D.;  N.  O.  Noben,  Grafton,  N.  D.;  J.  S.  Coxey,  Massilon,  O.;  Hugh 
Preyor,  Cleveland,  O.;  D.  D.  Chidester,  Ohio;  J.  W.  Marks- 
bury,  Gold  Hill,  Ore. ;  John  C.  Lucy,  John  Day,  Ore. ;  John  W.  Jory, 
Oregon;  Jerome  B.  Aitken,  Washington,  Pa.;  W.  Morris  Deisher, 
Reading,  Pa.;  V.  A.  Lotier,  Danville,  Pa.;  A.  J.  Plowman, 
Deadwood,  S.  D.;  Henry  S.  Volknar,  Milbank,  S.  D.;  H.  P.  Smith, 
Madison,  S.  D. ;  J.  H.  McDowell,  Union  City,  Tenn. ;  J.  P.  Buchanan, 
Wayside,  Tenn.;  J.  W.  James,  Chattanooga,  Tenn.;  C.  S.  Cranberry, 
Austin,  Tex.;  H.  L.  Bentley,  Abilene,  Tex.;  Harry  Tracey,  Dallas, 
Tex.;  James  Hogan,  Ogden,  Utah;  Mrs.  Kate  S.  Hillard,  Ogden, 
Utah;  H.  W.  Lawrence,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah;  G.  W.  B.  Hale,  Rocky 
Mount,  Va.;  J.  H.  Hobson,  Belona,  Va.;  J.  W.  McGavock,  Graham 
Ford,  Va.;  A.  J.  Beebe,  Swanton,  Vt.;  A.  T.  Way,  Burlington,  Vt.; 
C.  S.  Louis,  South  Reading,  Vt.;  E.  W.  Way,  Seattle,  Wash.;  A.  P. 
Tugwell,  Chehallis,  Wash.;  C.  W.  Young,  Pullman,  Wash.;  Nat. 
Fitzgerald,  Terra  Alta,  W.  Va.;  W.  R.  Neale,  Parkersburg,  W.  Va.; 
H.  T.  Houston,  Alderson,  W.  Va.;  Robert  Schilling,  Milwaukee,  Wis.; 


290  THREE  NATIONAL  COMMITTEES. 

C.  M.  Butt,  Viroqua,  Wis.;  William  Munro,  West  Superior,  Wis.; 
L.  C.  Tidball,  Sheridan,  Wyo.;  Earl  Hoffer,  Sundance,  Wyo.;  Peter 
Esperson,  Cheyenne,  Wyo.;  W.  O.  O'Neill,  Prescott,  Ariz.;  Dr.  A. 
H.  Noon,  Oro  Blanco,  Ariz.;  Kean  St.  Charles,  Kingman,  Ariz.;  M. 
T.  Stamm,  Albuquerque,  N.  M.;  T.  B.  Mills,  Las  Vegas,  N.  M.; 
Thomas  F.  Kelcher,  Albuquerque,  N.  M. ;  J.  S.  Soule,  Guthrie,  O.  T. ; 
R.  E.  Bray,  Enid,  O.  T.;  W.  H.  French,  Chandler,  O.  T.;  J.  H.  Tur- 
ner, Washington,  D.  C. ;  Rev.  E.  Kent,  Washington,  D.  C. ;  H.  B. 
Martin,  Washington,  D.  C;  W.  H.  Watkins,  Indian  Territory;  G.  W. 
Payne,  Indian  Territory;  A.  B.  Weakley,  Indian  Territory. 

NATIONAL  SILVER  PARTY  NATIONAL  COMMITTEE. 
Executive  Committee. 
Chairman,  Charles  D.  Lane,  Angel's  Camp,  Cal.;  Vice-Chairman, 
Isaac  N.  Stevens,  Denver,  Col.;  Treasurer,  William  P.  St.  John,  New 
York,  N.  Y. ;  Secretary,  R.  E.  Difenderfer,  Philadelphia,  Pa.;  William 
H.  Harvey,  Chicago,  111.;  George  P.  Keeney,  San  Francisco,  Cal.; 
Curtis  J.  Hillyer,  Washington,  D.  C. ;  George  S.  Nixon,  Winnemucca, 
Nev. ;  Benjamin  A.  Flower,  Boston,  Mass. 

Remaining  Members  of  National  Committee. 

R.  H.  Walker,  Athens,  Ala.;  Dr.  J.  J.  White  (of  Arizona), 
Washington,  D.  C;  G.  W.  Baker,  San  Francisco,  Cal.;  Alexander 
Troup,  New  Haven,  Conn.;  G.  G.  Harvey,  Florida;  Judge  Clag- 
get,  Boise  City,  Idaho;  Dr.  G.  M.  Emerick,  Chicago,  111.;  Anson  Wal- 
cott,  Walcott  P.  O.,  Ind.;  Amos  Steckel,  Bloomfield,  la.;  R.  W.  Tur- 
ner, Mankato,  Kas. ;  J.  P.  Hendrick,  Flemingsburg,  Ky.;  C.  R.  Darby, 
Sellman,  Md. ;  E.  B.  Newhall,  Lynn,  Mass. ;  E.  E.  Jarvis,  Benton  Har- 
bor, Mich.;  J.  W.  Griffin,  Minneapolis,  Minn.;  J.  D.  Clarkson,  St. 
Louis,  Mo.;  C.  G.  Bradshaw,  Butte,  Mont.;  G.  L.  Laws,  Lincoln, 
Neb.;  Thomas  Wrenn,  Eureka,  Nev.;  S.  W.  Reese,  Westfield,  N.  J.; 
B.  F.  Keith,  Wilmington,  N.  C;  W.  H.  Standish,  Grand  Forks,  N.  D.; 
H.  T.  Niles,  Toledo,  O.;  A.  Hofer,  Salem,  Ore.;  J.  W.  Bowden,  Den- 
ver P.  O.,  S.  C;  F.  Kehler,  Galveston,  Tex.;  Richard  Mackintosh, 
Salt  Lake,  Utah;  Joseph  Battell,  Middlebury,  Vt.;  Alexander  J.  Wed- 
derburn  (of  Virginia),  Washington,  D.  C;  G.  W.  Thompson,  Ta- 
coma,  Wash.;  I.  C.  Ralfsnyder,  Fairmount,  W.  Va. ;  Rublee  A.  Cole, 
Milwaukee,  Wis.;  Richard  Lewis,  Alaska;  M.  M.  Edmonston,  Vinita, 
Indian  Territory. 

The  Democratic  committee  opened  headquarters  at  Chicago,  but 
for  awhile  had  a  branch  office  at  Washington,  D.  C.     The  National 


THREE  NATIONAL  COMMITTEES.  291 

Silver  party  and  the  People's  party  had  their  headquarters  at  Wash- 
ington, the  former  with  a  branch  at  Chicago.  The  three  national 
committees  deserve  great  credit  for  the  manner  in  which  they  conducted 
the  campaign.  They  were  very  much  embarrassed  by  lack  of  funds,  but 
utilized,  for  the  circulation  of  literature,  all  the  money  they  could  ob- 
tain. The  Democratic  committee  sent  out  a  great  many  speeches 
and  arranged  for  a  large  number  of  public  meetings.  Hon.  D.  Mc- 
Connville  of  Springfield,  O.,  was  in  charge  of  the  speaker's  bureau. 
Senator  A.  P.  Gorman  of  Maryland,  was  in  charge  of  the  campaign  in 
the  Eastern  States.  The  Democratic  committee  received  great  aid 
from  the  Democratic  Congressional  Committee,  of  which  Senator 
Charles  J.  Faulkner  of  West  Virginia  was  chairman,  and  from  the 
National  Association  of  Democratic  Clubs,  of  which  Hon.  Chauncey 
F.  Black,  of  York,  Pa.,  was  president  and  Hon.  Lawrence  Gardner  of 
the  District  of  Columbia,  secretary. 

On  the  22d  of  August,  Chairman  Jones  issued  the  following  appeal : 

Appeal  for  Funds. 

To  the  People  of  the  United  States:  The  Democratic  party  in  the  present 
contest  is  engaged  in  the  defense  of  the  plain  people  against  the  encroachments 
of  the  favored  classes.  This  is  purely  an  economic  issue.  In  its  importance, 
however,  it  overshadows  every  question  which  has  occupied  public  attention 
since  the  tragic  campaign  of  i860.  It  presents  an  alternative  at  once  impera- 
tive and  terrible;  it  is  imperative  because  delay  may  take  from  us  the  possibility 
of  choice,  and  terrible  because  of  the  dire  consequences  which  must  follow 
failure. 

Is  the  American  Union  big  enough,  strong  enough  and  patriotic  enough  to 
have  its  own  financial  policy?  If  not,  then  we  are  the  serfs  of  the  money 
changers  of  Europe  and  their  agents  in  this  country,  and  are  doomed  to  a 
vassalage  more  ignominious  and  more  degrading  than  that  against  which  our 
fathers  fought  a  century  ago.  Our  manhood,  our  freedom,  the  fruits  of  our 
industry,  the  integrity  of  our  homes,  everything  that  enlightened  men  hold 
dear — all  these  are  the  playthings  of  aliens  and  the  prey  of  usurers. 

The  American  people  are  not  ready  to  surrender  the  liberties  for  which 
their  forefathers  shed  their  blood.  We  believe  that  liberty  and  self-government 
are  destined  to  remain  the  heritage  of  this  splendid  nation;  that  we  shall  not 
be  fated  to  become  a  living  lie,  a  nation  of  slaves,  callous  and  degraded  enough 
to  wear  only  the  mask  of  freedom. 

We  have  allied  against  us  in  this  contest  not  only  the  financial  forces  of 
Europe,  but  the  subsidized  press  and  all  the  monopolies  and  trusts  here  at 
home,  who  are  determined,  if  possible,  to  fix  forever  their  relentless  yoke  upon 
labor  of  all  kinds. 

To  oppose  them  we  must  rely  upon  the  patriotism  and  heroic  manliness 
of  the  plain  people — the  toilers  who  create  the  wealth  which  speculators  absorb. 
With  unlimited  money  in  their  hands,  our  enimies  are  printing  and  distributing 


292  THREE  NA  TIONAL  COMMITTEES. 

misleading  and  untruthfull  statements;  hired  speakers  and  paid  emissaries  are 
everywhere  attempting  to  mislead  and  delude  the  people. 

To  meet  and  counteract  this  we  must  distribute  documents  for  the  dissemi- 
nation of  the  truth;  we  must  expose  their  fallacies,  their  misstatements  and 
their  utter  selfishness. 

To  do  so  we  need  money  at  once,  and  can  only  hope  for  help  from  the 
plain  people.  We  ask  only  for  the  necessary  means  to  conduct  a  vigorous  and 
aggressive  campaign.  No  matter  in  how  small  sums,  no  matter  by  what  hum- 
ble contributions,  let  the  friends  of  liberty  and  national  honor  contribute  all 
they  can  to  the  good  cause.  To  the  overflowing  treasury  of  the  money  power 
we  will  oppose  the  accumulated  offerings  of  the  masses,  fighting  to  be  free, 
and  ask  the  Ruler  of  the  Universe  for  His  blessing. 

Wherever  there  is  a  bank  or  money  order  office  remittances  can  easily 
be  made  to  William  P.  St.  John,  treasurer  of  the  National  Democratic  Com- 
mittee, Bartholdi  Hotel,  New  York  City.  A  receipt  will  be  returned  in  every 
instance. 

When  victory  is  achieved  over  the  unscrupulous  combinations  which  are 
endeavoring  to  thrust  William  McKinley  into  the  presidential  office  the  re- 
corded list  of  the  contributors  to  this  good  cause  will  be  a  roll  of  honor  of 
which  any  one  may  well  be  proud. 

James  K.  Jones,  Chairman  National  Democratic  Committee. 

As  a  result  of  this  appeal  a  considerable  sum  was  realized,  most 
of  it  being  subscribed  in  small  amounts.  Many  newspapers  called  for 
subscriptions  and  the  money  raised  by  them  was  of  material  assistance. 
The  New  York  Journal  raised  the  largest  fund,  turning  over  to  the 
National  Committee  $40,901.20.  Of  this  sum  $15,000  was  subscribed 
by  the  Journal  itself. 

Mr.  Stevens  was  in  charge  of  the  headquarters  of  the  National 
Silver  party  and  his  committee  circulated  some  eight  million  docu- 
ments. One  million  copies  of  Archbishop  Walsh's  pamphlet  on  bi- 
metallism were  distributed,  one  half  being  printed  in  English  and  one 
half  in  German,  This  committee  circulated  125,000  copies  of  Coin's 
Financial  School  and  also  organized  about  five  thousand  silver  clubs, 
composed  largely  of  persons  who  had  been  Republicans. 

In  addition  to  this,  the  committee  was  instrumental  in  organizing 
the  Women's  National  Silver  League,  with  Mrs.  Lillie  Duncanson  as 
president.  The  headquarters  of  this  league  were  established  at  Chi- 
cago and  branch  leagues  organized  in  various  parts  of  the  country. 

The  Executive  Committee  of  the  People's  party  co-operated  with 
the  Democratic  party  in  securing  fusion  upon  electors  in  as  many 
States  as  possible.  The  address  published  below  was  issued  just  before 
the  close  of  the  campaign  and  was  both  a  justification  of  the  course 
pursued  by  the  committee  and  an  appeal  to  the  members  of  the  Pop- 
ulist party  to  support  the  fusion  electors. 


THREE  NATIONAL  COMMITTEES.  293 

Address  Issued  by  Populist  Convention. 

To  the  People's  Party  Voters  of  the  United  States:  Your  national  commit- 
tee indulged  the  hope  that  the  patriotic  action  of  the  People's  party  in  national 
convention  in  subordinating  the  interests  of  party  to  the  success  of  the  vital 
issues  involved  in  this  campaign  would  be  met  by  equally  unselfish  devotion 
to  a  common  interest  on  the  part  of  the  Democratic  party,  and  that  all  the 
friends  of  silver  could  present  a  solid  front  against  the  minions  of  greed  by  sup- 
porting one  ticket,  the  truly  co-operative  ticket,  Bryan  and  Watson.  But  this 
hope  being  disappointed,  there  were  but  two  courses  left,  one  of  which  must  be 
adopted. 

First.  To  run  a  straight  Bryan  and  Watson  electoral  ticket  in  every  State, 
which,  on  account  of  the  failure  of  the  Democratic  party  to  support  this  ticket, 
would  have  eflfected  the  same  result  in  this  campaign  that  would  have  followed 
the  nomination  of  a  straight  Populist  ticket  at  St.  Louis,  namely,  the  election 
of  McKinley  and  the  triumph  of  the  gold  standard. 

It  is  true  that  the  Democratic  party  would  be  responsible  even  to  a  greater 
extent  than  ourselves  for  such  a  result,  but  to  permit  evil  to  triumph  on  such 
grounds  would  convict  us  as  well  as  them  of  a  lack  of  patriotism  and  narrow 
partisanship  that  would  deservedly  forfeit  to  us  the  confidence  of  the  American 
people.     Remember  that  two  wrongs  never  make  a  right. 

When  our  devotion  to  the  welfare  of  the  people  falters  because  of  any 
failure  on  the  part  of  the  Democratic  or  any  other  party,  then  indeed  will  w« 
have  lowered  our  standard  and  proven  ourselves  false  to  our  own  teachings  and 
repudiated  our  own  motto  of  country  first,  and  men  and  parties  second.  The 
brave,  enlightened  voters  who  constitute  the  rank  and  file  of  the  People's  party 
are  incapable  of  such  base  betrayal  of  their  country  as  would  result  from  a 
division  in  the  ranks  of  those  opposing  the  machinations  of  the  confederated 
money  power  of  the  two  continents  against  the  homes  and  liberties  of  the 
American  people,  and  would  repudiate  any  action  on  the  part  of  their  leaders 
opposed  to  united  effort  at  this  time,  as  they  repudiated  the  old  parties  for 
treachery  to  their  interests. 

The  other  course  left  open  to  your  committee  that  was  consistent  with  the 
action  of  the  convention  in  nominating  Mr.  Bryan  was  to  do  everything  in  its 
power  to  unite  the  voters  of  the  country  against  McKinley,  and  to  overcome 
the  obstacles  and  embarrassments  which,  if  the  Democratic  party  had  put  the 
cause  first  and  party  second,  we  would  not  have  encountered. 

This  could  be  accomplished  only  by  arranging  for  a  division  of  the  electoral 
vote  in  every  State  possible,  securing  so  many  electors  for  Bryan  and  Watson 
and  conceding  so  many  to  Bryan  and  Sewall.  At  the  opening  of  the  campaign 
this,  under  the  circumstances,  seemed  the  wisest  course  for  your  committee, 
and  it  is  clearer  today  than  ever  that  it  was  the  only  safe  and  wise  course  if  our 
votes  were  to  be  cast  and  made  effective  for  the  relief  of  an  oppressed  and  out- 
raged people.  Following  this  line  of  policy  your  committee  has  arranged 
electoral  tickets  in  three-fourths  of  the  States  and  will  do  all  in  its  power 
to  make  the  same  arrangements  in  all  of  the  States. 

By  perfecting  this  arrangement,  and  every  sincere  opponent  of  the  gold 
standard  giving  loyal  support  to  these  joint  electoral  tickets,  the  People's 
party  will  not  only  secure  in  the  electoral  college  for  Bryan  and  Watson  several 

n 


294  THREE  NA  TIONAL  COMMITTEES. 

times  as  many  votes  as  we  could  have  possibly  secured  by  making  a  straight 
fight,  but  we  will  secure  the  defeat  of  McKinley  and  the  gold  standard,  which 
should  now  be  the  greatest  desire  of  every  citizen  who  believes  in  the  principles 
of  true  Democracy  as  taught  by  Jefferson,  and  of  true  Republicanism  as  repre- 
sented by  Abraham  Lincoln. 

By  this  arrangement  we  can  unite  a  large  majority  of  the  voters  of  America 
on  our  joint  electoral  tickets;  therefore  the  only  hope  of  the  money  power  and 
trust  is  divide  and  conquer.  The  Republican  managers  and  their  gold  Demo- 
cratic allies  realize  this,  and  are  putting  forth  every  effort  to  accomplish  this  end. 
They  have  had  their  emissaries  on  hand  everywhere  trying  to  prevent  joint 
electoral  tickets  from  being  arranged;  failing  in  this,  they  try  to  find  Populists 
and  silver  Democrats  who  can  be  induced,  on  one  pretext  or  another,  to  rebel 
against  the  joint  electoral  tickets.  They  either  have  secured,  or  will  secure, 
the  services  of  every  man  that  money  can  command,  to  breed  dissensions  and 
divisions. 

The  danger  lies  in  the  possibility  of  a  certain  portion  of  the  rank  and  file 
of  the  People's  party  being  misled  by  so-called  leaders,  who,  for  reasons  best 
known  to  themselves,  or  for  want  of  reason,  are  advising  voters  to  rebel  against  ■ 
the  joint  electoral  tickets  and  put  up  separate  electoral  tickets,  or  to  withhold 
their  support  from  the  joint  electoral  tickets. 

Some  of  the  Democrats  of  the  revenue  stripe,  who  are  not  yet  weaned  from 
the  fieshpots  of  Egypt,  but  are  sticklers  for  regularity,  and  are, nominally  sup- 
porting Mr.  Bryan,  while  secretly  and  in  every  underhanded  way  are  trying 
to  accomplish  his  defeat,  are  advising  against  the  joint  electoral  tickets,  and 
failing  in  this  they  advise  Democrats  to  scratch  People's  party  electors,  and 
already  a  few  so-called  Populist  leaders  are  advising  the  rank  and  file  of  our 
party  to  strike  back  by  refusing  to  support  the  Democratic  electors  on  the  joint 
electoral  tickets.  This  is  a  trap  set  by  the  goldbugs,  who  are  rejoicing  that  a 
few  honest  men  have  fallen  into  it.  These  reports  today  are  the  only  ones  that 
buoy  up  the  hopes  of  the  Republican  managers,  and  the  Democrats  and 
Populists  who  are  thus  engaged  are  doing  just  what  the  gold  men  most  desire. 
Therefore  we  appeal  to  every  Populist,  who  may  have  been  misled  by  such 
mistaken  or  false  pleas  of  pretended  loyalty  to  the  People's  party  into  refusing 
support  to  such  joint  electoral  tickets,  to  stop  and  consider  the  results  of  such 
conduct,  and  refuse  to  be  influenced  by  either  misguided  or  corrupt  men. 

There  are  but  two  sides  in  the  conflict  that  is  being  waged  in  this  country 
today.  On  the  one  side  are  the  allied  hosts  of  monopolies,  the  money  power, 
great  trusts,  and  railway  corporations,  who  seek  the  enactment  of  laws  to  bene- 
fit them  and  impoverish  the  people.  On  the  other  side  are  the  farmers,  laborers, 
merchants,  and  all  others  who  produce  wealth  and  bear  the  burden  of  taxation. 
The  one  represents  the  wealthy  and  powerful  classes  who  want  the  control  of 
the  Government  to  plunder  the  people.  The  other  represents  the  people,  con- 
tending for  equality  before  the  law  and  the  rights  of  man.  Between  these  two 
there  is  no  middle  ground. 

The  one  and  only  hope  of  the  Republican  party  to  win  in  this  campaign 
and  fasten  the  gold  standard  upon  the  country  is  the  corrupt  use  of  an  unlimited 
supply  of  money  for  bribery,  corruption,  and  intimidation.  The  patriotic  action 
of  the  PeoplvVs  party  in  forming  and  supporting  these  joini  electoral  tickets  has 


THREE  NA  TIONAL  COMMITTEES.  295 

shattered  that  hope.  Already  they  are  alarmed  at  the  impotency  of  a  boodle 
campaign,  when  all  of  the  great  moral  forces  of  the  peopit  are  solidly  united  in 
defense  of  American  institutions.  The  revulsion  of  the  American  people  against 
this  boodle  campaign  during  the  last  ten  days  has  so  united  them  that  victory  is 
now  assured. 

The  People's  party  made  this  revolution  possible.  Let  every  one  do  his 
duty  and  fail  not.  Let  our  boast  be  that  we  are  American  citizens,  and  that 
American  citizens  are  more  than  partisans. 

This  done,  the  cohorts  of  domestic  and  foreign  greed  will  be  driven  from 
our  legislative  councils  and  the  domination  of  American  institutions;  this  done, 
and  the  betrayed  Republic  will  be  redeemed  and  American  prosperity  restored. 
The  men  and  the  party  that  achieve  such  grand  and  patriotic  results  in  this 
crisis  will  be  the  men  and  the  party  of  the  future.  It  has  been  left  for  the 
People's  party  and  the  silver  Republicans  to  make  the  party  sacrifice  and  to 
do  the  patriotic  work  necessary  to  accomplish  this  result. 

The  People's  party  must  do  it,  for  no  other  party  will;  the  People's  party 
will  do  it.  Therefore,  the  People's  party  will  be  the  party  of  the  future.  The 
American  people  will  recognize  it  as  the  agency  that  saved  the  day  when  their 
interests  were  at  stake;  the  American  people  will  rally  around  its  banner 
as  the  party  to  contend  against  the  enemy  of  good  government  in  the  future. 
Every  man  to  his  post,  and  the  victory  is  won. 

Marion  Butler,  Chairman; 

J.   R.   Sovereign, 

H.   W.    Reed, 

George  F.  Washburn, 

John   W.    Breidenthal, 

M.  C.   Rankin, 

C.    F.   Taylor, 

J.   A.    Edgerton,    Secretary. 

After  a  campaign  is  over,  it  is  sometimes  possible  to  point  to  mis- 
takes in  management  which  affected  the  result,  but  I  do  not  believe 
that  any  one  will  be  able  to  point  out  a  serious  mistake  made  by  either 
of  the  above  committees,  nor  can  one  point  to  an  instance  in  which 
either  committee  failed  to  improve  an  opportunity  presented.  Their 
work  deserves  the  greater  commendation  when  it  is  remembered  that 
many  of  those  prominent  in  the  three  committees  had  had  but  little 
previous  experience  in  political  management. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


PREPARING  FOR  THE  CAMPAIGN. 

THE  days  which  intervened  between  the  return  from  the  con- 
vention and  the  departure  for  New  York  were  spent  in  Lin- 
coln, with  the  exception  of  one  day  when  I  went  to  Omaha  to 
meet  the  people  of  that  city.  The  reception  there  was  conducted  with 
Democratic  simplicity,  consisting  of  an  impromptu  escort  from  the 
depot  to  a  platform  erected  at  the  intersection  of  15th  and  Douglas 
streets,  where  I  was  welcomed  by  Mayor  Broatch,  made  a  brief  ad- 
dress and  shook  hands  with  the  crowd. 

At  Lincoln  the  time  was  spent,  first,  in  answering  telegrams  and 
letters  of  congratulation,  then  in  receiving  delegations  en  route  to  the 
Populist  and  Silver  Conventions  at  St.  Louis,  then  in  receiving  news 
from  the  conventions,  and  afterwards  in  the  preparation  of  my  Madison 
Square  Garden  speech. 

The  action  of  the  National  Silver  Convention  was  known  in  ad- 
vance, but  there  was  considerable  uncertainty  as  to  the  result  of  the 
Populist  Convention.  The  Populists  were  divided  in  sentiment  into 
three  classes.  First,  there  were  those  who  were  in  favor  of  endorsing 
the  Chicago  ticket  entire ;  second,  those  who  were  in  favor  of  endorsing 
the  ticket  to  the  extent  of  the  Presidential  nomination,  but  in  favor  of 
a  Populist  for  Vice-President ;  and,  third,  those  who  favored  the  nomi- 
nation of  a  Populist  ticket  entire.  It  was  noticeable,  too,  that,  as  a 
rule,  the  States  in  which  the  Populists  and  Democrats  had  been  in  the 
habit  of  co-operating  against  the  Republicans  sent  delegations  more 
friendly  to  fusion  than  the  States  wherein  the  Populist  party  had  been 
a  menace  to  Democratic  supremacy.  I  fully  realized  the  embarrass- 
ment which  differing  conditions  brought  about.  In  Nebraska,  the 
Populists  and  Democrats  had  in  several  campaigns  acted  together, 
noticeably  in  the  election  of  Hon.  William  V.  Allen  to  the  United 
States  Senate,  and  in  the  election  of  Hon.  Silas  A.  Holcomb,  Governor. 
Then,  too,  in  Nebraska,  the  Populists,  Democrats  and  silver  Repub- 
licans had  acted  together  in  carrying  on  the  educational  work  in  be- 
half of  bimetallism,  and  this  association  made  co-operation  in  national 
politics  easier.    In  fact,  I  believe  that  my  nomination  can  be  attributed 

296 


PREPARING  FOR  THE  CAMPAIGN.  297 

more  to  the  friendly  relations  existing  between  the  Democrats,  Popu- 
lists and  free  silver  Republicans  than  to  any  other  one  cause. 

The  opposition  of  the  Populists  to  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Sewall 
placed  me  in  an  embarrassing  position.  Throughout  the  entire  cam- 
paign it  was  the  most  trying  feature. 

When  the  convention  decided  to  nominate  the  Vice-President  first  it 
became  apparent  that  it  would  select  a  Populist  for  that  office,  and  Sen- 
ator Jones  wired  me  giving  his  opinion  and  asking  mine.  These  dis- 
patches were  published  before  my  nomination,  and  referred  to  by  Mr. 
Weaver  in  his  nominating  speech.  The  delegates  took  the  position 
that,  whether  I  was  a  candidate  or  not,  they  had  a  right  to  nominate 
me  if  they  desired  to  do  so.  When  the  nomination  was  finally  an- 
nounced I  gave  to  the  press  the  following  statement,  which  contains 
Senator  Jones'  telegram  and  my  reply: 

The  Interview, 

When  the  Populists  decided  to  nominate  the  Vice-President  first  Senator 
Jones,  chairman  of  the  Democratic  National  Committee,  wired  me  as  follows: 
"Populists  nominate  Vice-President  first.  If  not  Sewall,  what  shall  we  do? 
Answer  quick.  I  favor  your  declination  in  that  case."  I  answered  immediately: 
"I  entirely  agree  with  you.    Withdraw  my  name  if  Sewall  is  not  nominated." 

These  dispatches  were  published  in  this  morning's  papers  and  the  conven- 
tion understood  my  position.  In  spite  of  this  it  has  seen  fit  to  nominate  me. 
Whether  I  shall  accept  the  nomination  or  not  will  depend  upon  the  conditions 
which  are  attached  to  it.  My  first  desire  is  to  aid  in  securing  the  immediate 
restoration  by  the  United  States  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and 
silver  at  the  present  legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent 
of  any  other  nation. 

The  Republican  platform  declares  that  the  bimetallic  system  should  be 
restored,  but  asserts  that  we,  as  a  people,  are  helpless  to  secure  bimetallism  for 
ourselves  until  foreign  nations  come  to  our  assistance.  We  cannot  afford  to 
surrender  our  right  to  legislate  for  ourselves  upon  every  question,  and  so  long 
as  that  right  is  disputed  no  other  question  can  approach  it  in  importance. 

I  appreciate  the  desire,  manifested  at  St.  Louis,  to  consolidate  all  the  free 
silver  forces,  and  regret  that  they  did  not  nominate  Mr.  Sewall  also.  He  stands 
squarely  upon  the  Chicago  platform  and  has  defended  our  cause  against  greater 
opposition  than  we  have  had  to  meet  in  the  West  and  South. 

The  Populist  platform  is,  on  many  questions,  substantially  identical  with 
the  Chicago  platform;  it  goes  beyond  the  Chicago  platform,  however,  and  en- 
dorses some  policies  of  which  I  do  not  approve.  All  that  I  can  now  say  is  that 
my  action  will  depend  entirely  upon  the  conditions  attached  to  the  nomination. 

I  shall  do  nothing  which  will  endanger  the  success  of  bimetallism,  nor  shall 
I  do  anything  unfair  to  Mr.  Sewall. 

This  interview  was  my  only  public  utterance  in  regard  to  the  nomi- 
nation until  my  letter  of  acceptance  was  written. 


298  PREPARING  POP  THE  CAMPAIGN. 

I  received  by  mail  a  letter  written  by  Mr.  Sewall  immediately  after 
the  nomination  of  Mr.  Watson,  and  before  the  above  interview  appeared 
in  print.  This  letter  was  afterwards  published  by  Mr.  Jones  and  I  re- 
produce it  here  because  it  shows  the  attitude  in  which  Mr.  Sewall 
stood  during  the  campaign.  He  would  have  been  willing  at  any  time 
to  sacrifice,  his  own  ambition  for  the  good  of  the  cause,  had  his  with- 
drawal been  thought  wise  by  the  leaders  of  the  party;  but  there  was 
never  a  time  when,  in  their  opinion,  his  withdrawal  would  have  aided 
the  success  of  the  ticket.    The  letter  reads : 

Bath,  Me.,  July  25,  1896. 
Hon.  J.  W.  Bryan,  Lincoln,  Nebraska. — My  Dear  Mr.  Bryan:  In  view  of 
the  action  of  the  St.  Louis  Convention,  I  cannot  refrain  from  giving  you 
my  thoughts  upon  the  situation.  My  advices  are  that  you  have  been  nominated 
a  candidate  for  President  and  Mr.  Watson  for  Vice-President.  I  also  learn 
from  press  dispatches  that  you  are  somewhat  undecided  whether  you 
ought  to  accept  or  decline.  Now,  I  desire  to  say  to  you,  with  the  utmost 
frankness  and  good  feeling,  that  you  must  not  allow  any  personal  con- 
sideration for  me  to  influence  you  in  your  action.  I  desire  you  to  do  just 
what  you  believe  to  be  best  for  the  success  of  our  ticket.  The  principles  which 
we  are  fighting  for  are  so  paramount  to  any  personal  consideration  that 
the  latter  should  not  have  any  weight  or  influence  whatever  with  your 
action.  I  cannot  for  a  moment  allow  myself  to  be  a  factor  in  any  action  on 
your  part  that  would,   in  the  slightest  degree,   hazard  an  electoral  vote   for 

you. 

Your  sincere  friend, 

ARTHUR  SEWALL. 

Looking  back  over  the  campaign  I  am  now  convinced  that  under 
the  conditions  then  existing  two  Vice-Presidential  candidates  were 
better  than  one,  and  that,  notwithstanding  the  embarrassment  at  the 
time,  the  silver  cause  made  a  better  showing  tlian  it  would  have  done  if 
Mr.  Sewall  had  withdrawn  in  favor  of  Mr.  Watson,  or  Mr.  Watson  in 
favor  of  Mr.  Sewall. 

Scarcely  a  day  passed  between  the  adjournment  of  the  conven- 
tion and  election  day  that  I  was  not  asked  to  confirm  or  deny  some 
campaign  rumor.  Stories  in  regard  to  promised  cabinet  appoint- 
ments came  first.  After  the  discussion  had  proceeded  far  enough  to 
interest  the  public,  I  gave  out  the  following  statement,  under  date 
of  August  2: 

I  have  not  directly  or  indirectly  promised  any  ofUce  of  any  kind  to  any 
person  whomsoever,  and  shall  not  during  the  campaign  promise  any  office  of 
any  kind  to  any  person  whomsoever. 

I  may  add  that  with  the  exception  of  less  than  half  a  dozen  minor 
postoffices,  nobody  during  the  campaign  asked  for  any  appointment 
or  promise  of  appointment. 


PREPARING  FOR  THE  CAMPAIGN.  299 

In  consultation  with  the  National  Committee  I  had  favored  the 
opening  of  the  campaign  in  New  York  City,  believing  that  it  would 
arouse  the  enthusiasm  of  our  supporters  to  attack  the  enemy  first  in 
the  stronghold  of  the  gold  sentiment. 

The  determination  to  read  the  speech  was  formed  as  soon  as  its 
preparation  was  commenced.  This  being  the  first  speech  of  the  cam- 
paign, it  would  necessarily  be  subjected  to  hostile  criticism  by  the 
opposition  press  and  I  was  compelled  to  choose  between  an  extempo- 
raneous speech,  which  would  be  less  concise  and  comprehensive,  and 
a  speech  which,  because  read  from  manuscript,  would  disappoint  the 
audience.  I  knew,  too,  that  in  order  to  secure  the  publication  of  an 
accurate  report  of  the  speech  in  the  daily  papers  it  would  be  necessary 
to  furnish  a  copy  in  advance  of  delivery,  and  I  knew  that  if  delivered 
from  memory  it  would  be  taken  down  in  shorthand  and  compared  with 
the  copy  furnished  to  the  press.  After  weighing  the  relative  advan- 
tages of,  and  objections  to,  the  two  modes  of  delivery,  I  concluded 
that  it  was  the  part  of  wisdom  to  disappoint  the  few  thousands  who 
would  be  in  the  hall  in  order  to  reach  the  hundreds  of  thousands  who 
would  read  it  in  print.  Having  decided  to  use  my  manuscript  it  was 
necessary  to  make  the  speech  as  brief  as  possible  because  the  crime  of 
reading  a  speech  increases  in  heinousness  in  proportion  to  its  length. 

In  order  to  emphasize  the  silver  question  as  the  paramount  issue 
of  the  campaign  I  left  to  my  letter  of  acceptance  all  the  other  parts  of 
the  platform,  making  an  exception  only  of  the  income  tax  plank  which 
has  been  misconstrued  and  bitterly  assailed.  As  is  usual  in  the  prep- 
aration of  a  speech  for  an  important  occasion,  the  matter  was  the  sub- 
ject of  such  continuous  consideration  that  it  not  only  occupied  my 
thoughts  by  day,  but  at  once  suggested  itself  if  I  awoke  in  the  night. 
While  I  was  endeavoring  to  construct  a  fitting  conclusion  to  the  speech, 
there  occurred  to  me,  during  one  of  these  moments  of  wakefulness, 
the  idea  which  was  afterward  employed,  namely,  the  comparison  be- 
tween a  Columbia  waiting  for  foreign  aid  and  the  Goddess  of  Liberty 
enlightening  the  world.  This  conception  was  afterward  illustrated 
by  the  New  York  Journal,  and  it  has  always  seemed  to  me  to  repre- 
sent most  appropriately  the  difference  between  financial  independence 
and  the  doctrine  of  servile  acquiescence  in  a  foreign  policy. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


FROM  NEBRASKA  TO  THE  SEA. 

ON  Friday,  August  the  8th,  at  2  o'clock  p.  m.,  we  boarded  the 
Rock  Island  train  and  began  the  journey  to  New  York.  Be- 
sides the  newspaper  correspondents  our  party  consisted  of 
Mrs.  Bryan  and  myself.  The  crowd  had  gathered  at  the  depot,  and  in 
response  to  calls  for  a  speech,  I  said: 

The  Enemy's  Country, 

In  ordinary  times  I  would  have  desired  to  have  the  notification  take  place  at 
my  home.  But  this  is  not  an  ordinary  campaign,  and,  feeling  that  the  prin- 
ciples in  which  we  are  interested  should  rise  above  any  personal  preferences 
which  we  may  have,  I  expressed  the  desire  to  be  notified  in  New  York,  in  order 
that  our  cause  might  be  presented  first  in  the  heart  of  what  now  seems  to  be 
the  enemy's  country,  but  which  we  hope  to  be  our  country  before  this  cam- 
paign is  over.  I  appreciate  the  kindness  which  you,  our  neighbors,  have  shown 
in  gathering  here  to  bid  us  good  bye.  All  that  I  can  promise  you  is  that, 
whether  -what  I  do  meets  with  your  approval  or  not,  I  shall  do  my  duty  as  I  see 
it,  and  accept  all  consequences  which  may  follow. 

The  phrase  "the  enemy's  country"  was  picked  out  for  criticism  by 
our  opponents,  and  often  used  in  a  sense  entirely  different  from  the 
one  intended  by  me. 

At  Omaha  a  number  of  friends  had  assembled  and  a  still  larger 
number  at  Council  Bluffs.  Our  train  stopped  at  nearly  all  the  sta- 
tions, and  at  most  of  them  people  in  greater  or  less  numbers  had  as- 
sembled. I  made  short  speeches  at  Avoca,  Atlantic  and  Stuart.  We 
reached  Des  Moines  about  9:30  o'clock,  and  were  met  at  the  depot 
by  a  reception  committee  headed  by  ex-Governor  Boies  and  General 
James  B.  Weaver.  We  drove  across  the  river  to  the  tabernacle,  where 
the  principal  meeting  was  held.  The  hall  was  so  packed  with  peo- 
ple that  we  had  difficulty  in  getting  to  the  stage.  Mr.  Boies  pre- 
sided, and  introduced  me  in  a  very  graceful  speech.  I  referred  to 
the  campaigns  of  '91  and  '93,  when  I  visited  Iowa  and  spoke  in  be- 
half of  Governor  Boies.  In  speaking  of  his  candidacy  before  the 
National  Convention,  I  said: 

300 


FROM  NEBRASKA   TO  THE  SEA.  301 

Des  Moines  Speech. 

If  in  the  National  Convention  which  has  just  closed  the  choice  fell  upon  me 
rather  than  upon  him,  it  was  not  because  of  any  superior  merit  on  my  part,  but 
because  of  the  circumstances  which  surrounded  that  convention.  I  do  not 
take  unto  myself  credit  for  what  was  done.  I  believe  that  those  delegates 
were  as  honest  and  as  earnest  a  body  of  men  as  were  ever  assembled  in  con- 
vention. After  reviewing  the  situation  they  decided — whether  wisely  or  fool- 
ishly, time  will  tell — that,  under  all  the  circumstances,  the  nomination  should 
fall  to  me,  and  I  am  on  my  way  now  to  the  city  of  New  York  to  receive  the 
notification. 

I  did  not  speak  long,  and  avoided  here,  as  I  did  generally  before 
the  notification  meeting,  any  extended  discussion  of  political  ques- 
tions.    An  overflow  meeting  was  held  just  outside  of  the  hall. 

We  resumed  our  journey  at  7  o'clock  the  next  morning,  taking 
the  Rock  Island  train  for  Chicago.  This  was  a  slow  train,  and  stopped 
at  all  the  stations,  I  made  short  speeches  at  a  large  number  of  places 
that  day.  The  first  stop  was  at  Colfax,  the  home  of  General  James 
B.  Weaver.  Here  I  took  occasion  to  express  my  appreciation  of  his 
pioneer  work.  At  the  next  town,  Newton,  I  spoke  of  one  of  the 
laws  of  finance  called  to  mind  by  the  name  of  the  town.    I  said : 

Newton  Speech. 
Some  of  the  laws  of  finance — I  may  say  all  the  great  laws  of  finance — are 
as  certain  in  their  operation  and  as  irresistible  in  their  force  as  the  law  of 
gravitation.  If  you  throw  a  stone  into  the  air  you  know  that  it  will  come 
down.  Why?  Because  it  is  drawn  toward  the  center  of  the  earth.  The  law 
upon  which  we  base  our  fight  is  as  sure  as  the  law  of  gravitation.  If  we  have 
a  gold  standard,  prices  are  as  certain  to  fall  as  the  stone  which  is  thrown  into 
the  air. 

Short  stops  were  made,  among  other  places,  Grinnell,  Iowa  City, 
West  Liberty  and  Moscow.  Before  we  reached  Davenport  we  re- 
ceived a  committee  representing  the  Democrats  of  that  city,  and 
when  we  arrived  there  found  a  very  enthusiastic  crowd  of  silverites. 
Knowing  that  Davenport  was  considered  one  of  the  strongholds  of 
the  gold  Democrats,  I  was  both  surprised  and  pleased  to  find  so  much 
interest  manifested. 

During  the  run  through  Iowa  a  little  incident  occurred  which  illus- 
trates the  brevity  of  some  of  our  stops.  As  we  approached  one  of  the 
smaller  stations,  an  enthusiastic  supporter  announced  that  we  were 
coming  to  his  town  and  that  he  would  introduce  me  to  the  crowd. 
When  the  train  came  to  a  stop,  he  took  his  place  upon  the  rear  plat- 
form and  said  in  substance:  "Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  This  is  the 
proudest  moment  of  my  life.     It  gives  me  pleasure  to  introduce  to 


302  FROM  NEBRASKA   TO  THE  SEA. 

you  (the  train  then  began  to  move,  and  as  he  jumped  off  of  the 
car  he  concluded)  the  next  President  of  the  United  States,  WiUiam 
Jennings  Bryan."  By  this  time  the  train  had  gone  so  far  that  I  could 
only  bow  my  acknowledgments  and  retire. 

I  might  suggest  here  that  introductions  were  sometimes  so  eulo- 
gistic as  to  be  embarrassing.     Every  candidate  receives  the  title,  "the 

next  ,"  and   I   soon  became  accustomed   to  that   form   of 

introduction.  But  sometimes  the  zeal  of  the  presiding  officer  led 
him  into  such  extravagant  flattery  that  I  felt  tempted  to  tell  of  a 
form  of  introduction  which  was  once  employed  at  an  Illinois 
meeting.  As  this  meeting  brought  out  several  amusing  incidents 
v.hich  will  be  enjoyed  by  any  one  who  has  had  experience  in  pub- 
lic speaking,  I  will  describe  it.  In  the  month  of  October,  1884,  the 
Democratic  committee  made  an  appointment  for  me  to  address  the 
people  at  Buckhorn  schoolhouse,  which  is  situated  some  six  miles 
to  the  southwest  of  Jacksonville.  Mr.  M.  F.  Dunlap,  a  Democratic 
co-worker,  accompanied  me,  and,  as  neither  of  us  knew  the  road,  we 
inquired  the  way  from  time  to  time.  When  nearly  there,  a  gentleman 
rode  by  and  we  asked  about  the  road.  He  at  first  informed  us  that 
we  ought  to  have  turned  off  a  half  mile  back,  but  later  assured  us 
that  we  were  on  the  right  road,  explaining  that  when  he  gave  the 
first  answer  he  was  under  the  impression  that  we  were  going  out  to 
disturb  the  meeting.  On  arriving  at  the  schoolhouse  one  of  the 
crowd  was  quite  urgent  in  an  invitation  to  partake  of  the  contents 
of  a  bottle  of  hip-pocket  size.  When  the  offer  had  been  declined 
repeatedly,  the  gentleman  expressed  the  friendly  hope  that  I  would 
speak  as  well  as  I  could  anyhow,  emphasizing  the  "anyhow"  in  a 
way  that  indicated  that  he  could  not  expect  much  under  the  cir- 
cumstances. Before  the  meeting  was  called  to  order,  one  of  the  audi- 
ence cautioned  me  against  talking  too  long,  and  remarked  that  only 
a  few  nights  before  a  speaker  had  nearly  worn  them  out,  while  an- 
other encouraged  me  with  the  advice:  "Hit  'em  hard,  there  isn't  a 
Republican  here." 

The  chairman  of  the  meeting  asked  me  to  suggest  a  proper  form 
of  introduction,  and,  being  anxious  to  secure  whatever  professional 
advertisement  the  meeting  might  give,  I  replied  that  he  might  say: 
"Mr.  W.  J.  Bryan,  an  attorney  at  law,  of  Jacksonville,  will  now  ad- 
dress you."  His  enthusiasm,  together  with  his  embarrassment,  led 
to  an  abbreviated  introduction  which,  when  concluded,  sounded  about 
like  this:    "Mr.  O'Brien  will  now  spake." 


FROM  NEBRASKA   TO  THE  SEA.  303- 

I  have  often  referred  to  this  introduction  as  the  best  one  I  ever 
received,  because,  instead  of  raising  the  expectations  of  the  audience 
he  simply  threw  me  upon  the  mercy  of  my  hearers  and  left  me  to 
hoe  my  own  row.  This  meeting  has  been  fixed  in  my  mind  by 
the  additional  fact  that,  when  I  removed  to  Nebraska,  my  first  fee 
was  received  from  a  man  with  whom  I  became  acquainted  at  the 
Buckhorn  meeting,  and  who  located  in  Nebraska  just  before  I  did. 

But  to  return  to  the  journey. 

Crossing  the  Mississippi  we  entered  Illinois  at  Rock  Island,  and 
there  found  another  large  crowd  assembled,  as  there  was  also  at 
Moline.  We  made  short  stops  at  Geneseo,  Anawan,  and  Sheffield. 
At  Bureau  I  received  the  following  note  from  the  brother  of  the  great 
American  poet,  William  Cullen  Bryant:  "Princeton,  Illinois,  August 
8,  1896. — Eighty-nine  to  thirty-six — The  people's  man.  John  Howard 
Bryant." 

We  found  crowds  gathered  at  Spring  Valley  and  Peru.  At  the  last 
named  place,  finding  that  I  could  not  shake  hands  with  all,  I  em- 
ployed a  plan  of  which  I  learned  a  number  of  years  ago.  I  asked 
them  to  hold  up  their  hands,  and  then  we  shook  at  long  range, 
they  shaking  their  hands  and  I  mine. 

The  train  also  stopped  at  Ottawa,  Morris  and  Joliet.  There  was  a 
large  gathering  at  the  last  named  place,  and  here  we  met  the  Chicago 
reception  committee  of  more  than  a  hundred.  When  we  reached  Chica- 
go we  found  an  enormous  number  waiting  at  the  depot.  A  procession 
headed  by  the  police  and  made  up  of  the  reception  committee,  band, 
Cook  County  Democratic  Club,  Cook  County  Central  Committee, 
labor  organizations.  Cook  County  Silver  Club,  the  Chicago  Uni- 
versity Bryan  Club  and  the  Democratic  ward  clubs,  led  the  way  by 
a  roundabout  route  to  the  Clifton.  Great  enthusiasm  was  ex- 
hibited all  along  the  line  of  march.  The  crowd  assembled  in 
front  of  the  hotel  filled  the  streets  half  a  block  each  way,  and 
was  so  large  that  I  found  it  difficult  to  make  all  of  them  hear.  Judge 
W.  J.  Strong,  until  recently  a  Republican,  delivered  an  address  of 
greeting,  and  I  responded  in  a  brief  speech,  a  part  of  which  I  quote: 

Chicago  Speech— First  Reception. 
When  I  see  this  assemblage  tonight  and  then  remember  what  the  news- 
papers of  this  city  say,  I  am  reminded  of  an  expression  recently  made  by  one  of 
our  friends:  "There  is  nobody  on  our  side  but  the  people."  And  as  I  look 
into  the  faces  of  these  people  and  remember  that  our  enemies  call  them  a  mob, 
and  say  they  are  a  menace  to  free  government,  I  ask:  Who  shall  save  the 
people  from  themselves?    I  am  proud  to  have  in  this  campaign  the  support 


304  PROM  NEBRASKA  TO  THE  SEA. 

of  those  who  call  themselves  the  common  people.  If  I  had  behind  me  the 
great  trusts  and  combinations,  I  know  that  I  would  no  sooner  take  my  seat  than 
they  would  demand  that  I  use  my  power  to  rob  the  people  in  their  behalf.  But 
having  rather  the  support  of  the  great  toiling  masses,  I  know  that  when  they 
give  me  their  ballots  they  unite  in  saying,  "Do  your  duty  and  we  will  be  repaid." 
These  are  the  people  who  ask  no  favors  of  government;  these  are  the  people 
who  simply  ask  for  equality  before  the  law;  they  demand  equal  rights  to  all  and 
special  privileges  to  none.  I  am  glad  to  have  the  support  of  these  people, 
because  I  know  that  when  the  nation  is  in  peril  every  able-bodied  man  among 
them  is  willing  to  shoulder  his  musket  to  save  his  country;  and  I  believe  that 
those  who  are  good  enough  to  offer  their  blood  upon  the  altar  of  their  country 
in  time  of  danger  are  good  enough  to  trust  in  the  hour  of  peace  and  quiet. 

Mrs.  Bryan  and  I  attended  the  First  Presbyterian  church  at  Engle- 
wood  and  heard  Rev.  John  Clark  Hill,  who  had  been  called  to  the  pul- 
pit in  our  home  church.  We  rested  in  the  afternoon,  and  just  before 
midnight  took  the  train  for  Pittsburg.  Night  is  supposed  to  be  a  sea- 
son of  rest,  but  I  found  during  the  campaign  that  the  rule  could  not 
always  be  observed.  That  night  was  my  first  introduction  to  midnight 
campaigning.  At  Valparaiso,  Indiana,  we  found  a  thousand  or  more, 
many  of  them  students.  I  spoke  to  them  for  a  moment.  At  4:45  I 
was  again  up — this  time  to  greet  a  small  crowd  at  Columbia  City.  It 
was  half  past  five  when  we  reached  Fort  Wayne,  and  there  a  con- 
siderable number  had  assembled. 

At  Delphos,  Ohio,  the  depot  platform  gave  way,  causing  con- 
siderable fright,  but  no  injury.  This  was  the  first  experience  with 
falling  platforms,  but  during  the  campaign  there  were  five  or  six  other 
accidents  of  this  kind. 

At  Lima  a  large  crowd  had  assembled,  and  I  saw  some  with 
whose  faces  I  had  become  familiar  when  I  spoke  there  during  the 
summer  of  1895. 

At  Ada  I  met  a  number  of  the  students  whom  I  had  addressed 
about  a  year  before  upon  invitation  of  Prof.  Lehr,  of  the  Normal  Col- 
lege at  that  place. 

At  Bucyrus  I  was  introduced  by  ex-Congressman  Findley,  who 
has  for  many  years  been  identified  with  the  silver  cause;  he  was  a 
delegate  to  the  last  Democratic  National  Convention. 

There  was  a  considerable  crowd  at  Mansfield,  Senator  Sherman's 
home.  At  CrestHne  we  found  a  very  enthusiastic  audience  assem- 
bled, and  here  became  the  victim  of  the  snap  shot.  The  kodak  of 
every  size  and  make  presented  itself  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  but 
this  one  found  Mrs.  Bryan  with  her  hat  pushed  to  one  side,  and  just 
in  the  act  of  shaking  hands  with  an  enthusiastic  silverite. 


FROM  NEBRASKA   TO  THE  SEA.  305 

By  the  courtesy  of  Mr.  M.  W.  McDonald,  of  Gallon,  O.,  this  pic- 
ture is  reproduced  on  another  page. 

The  largest  Ohio  crowd  was  found  at  Canton.  I  give  below  the 
speech  made  there.  I  was  glad  to  be  able  to  pay  a  compliment  to 
my  opponent,  and  repeated  before  his  neighbors  what  I  had  said 
elsewhere  in  regard  to  his  personal  character. 

Canton  Speech* 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  When  I  received  notice  a  short 
time  ago  of  the  organization  of  a  silver  club  in  this  city,  I  little  imagined  the 
tremendous  sentiment  which  seems  to  be  behind  the  club.  I  am  glad  to  meet 
the  people  of  this  city,  the  home  of  my  distinguished  opponent,  and  am  glad 
in  their  presence  to  testify  to  his  high  character  and  great  personal  worth.  I 
shall  be  satisfied  if  as  an  individual  I  may  be  able  to  stand  beside  him  in  public 
esteem.  But,  my  friends,  this  is  not  a  contest  between  individuals.  It  matters 
little  to  the  American  people  whether  >our  distinguished  townsman  or  myself 
occupies  the  chief  executive  position  in  this,  the  greatest  nation  upon  earth, 
but  it  does  matter  a  great  deal  for  what  policies  the  President  shall  stand.  In 
this  campaign  the  personality  of  the  candidates  is  lost  sight  of  entirely  in  the 
principles  for  which  the  candidates  stand.  In  my  own  State  and  in  my  own 
city  there  are  many  people  who  believe  that  the  interests  of  the  country  will 
be  better  served  by  the  election  of  my  opponent,  and  I  am  gratified  to  know 
that  in  his  home  there  are  so  many  who  believe  that  the  interests  of  the 
country  will  be  best  served  by  his  defeat.  He  is  your  neighbor,  as  we  ordinarily 
use  the  word,  but  I  beg  you  to  turn  to  the  Scriptures  and  there  read  the 
parable  of  the  neighbor,  for  while  I  may  not  be  your  neighbor,  geographically 
speaking,  I  may  be  your  neighbor  in  the  sense  in  which  the  word  is  used  in 
the  parable.  In  this  contest  I  hope  to  be  the  neighbor  of  those  who  have  fallen 
among  thieves.  He  is  a  neighbor  who,  in  the  hour  of  distress,  brings  relief. 
At  this  time,  when  we  are  cursed  by  an  European  financial  policy  which  our 
opponents  tell  us  we  must  endure  until  relief  comes  to  us  from  abroad,  I  be- 
lieve that  that  man  is  the  neighbor  of  all  the  toiling  masses  who  asks  for  the 
immediate  restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the 
present  legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other 
nation.  I  tell  my  neighbors  at  home  that  I  shall  bear  them  no  ill  will  if  they 
believe  that  my  opponent  should  be  elected,  and  I  have  so  high  an  opinion  of 
my  opponent  that  I  know  he  will  say  to  his  townsmen  here  that  every  one  should 
be  free  to  make  his  ballot  represent  a  freeman's  will,  although  it  may  result 
in  keeping  your  distinguished  citizen  among  you  as  a  neighbor  still. 

Learning  on  my  departure  from  Chicago  that  some  effort  was  be- 
ing made  to  coerce  railroad  employes  into  the  support  of  the  Repub- 
lican ticket,  I  took  occasion  to  mention  the  subject  at  Alliance,  where 
many  railroad  men  were  gathered.     The  following  is  an  extract : 

Alliance  Speech. 
The  employer  and  the  employe  have  a  right  to  differ  in  politics.     Remember 
that  we  live  in  a  nation  where  the  salary  which  a  man  receives  does  not  purchase 


306  .  FROM  NEBRASKA   TO  THE  SEA. 

his  citizenship.  No  wages  are  high  enough  to  include  citizenship.  The  dollars 
which  are  paid  for  the  labor  of  the  hand  or  mind  are  paid  for  labor  and  not  for 
votes. 

This  subject  was  referred  to  in  several  subsequent  speeches. 

The  Pittsburg  reception  committee  met  us  at  Canton  and  a  large 
crowd  greeted  us  at  the  depot.  The  Pittsburg  meetings  were  a  sur- 
prise both  in  attendance  and  in  enthusiasm.  After  witnessing  an  un- 
usual demonstration,  I  said: 

Pittsburgh  Speech. 
I  thought  it  might  be  necessary  in  coming  so  far  towards  the  East  to  bring 
with  me  a  few  of  our  people  to  keep  up  the  enthusiasm  while  I  defended  the 
principles  set  forth  in  the  Chicago  platform.  But  after  seeing  a  few  audiences 
like  this  I  am  wondering  whether  I  should  not  take  a  few  of  you  back  with  me 
to  set  an  example  of  enthusiasm  to  the  people  of  the  West.  It  is  no  longer 
"the  wild  West,"  it  is  the  wild  East  now. 

In  the  speeches  at  Pittsburg,  I  discussed  the  general  principles  of 
government,  avoiding  campaign  issues  as  far  as  possible.  After  the 
meetings,  Mrs.  Bryan  and  I  attended  a  reception  given  by  the  Samuel 
J.  Randall  Club  and  were  notified  of  our  election  to  honorary  member- 
ship in  the  club,  she  having  the  distinction  of  being  the  only  lady  to 
whom  the  compliment  had  been  paid. 

We  left  the  next  morning  over  the  Pennsylvania  for  New  York. 
Hon.  James  Kerr  of  Pennsylvania,  Clerk  of  the  House  while  I  was  in 
Congress  and  during  the  late  campaign  a  member  of  the  Campaign 
Committee,  met  us  at  Pittsburg  and  took  charge  of  our  party  to  New 
York.  Our  train  only  made  a  few  stops,  the  principal  ones  being  at 
Altoona,  Harrisburg,  Lancaster  and  Philadelphia,  where  large  crowds 
were  gathered. 

It  was  dark  when  we  reached  New  York  and  we  were  met  by 
Chairman  Jones  of  the  National  Committee,  Mr.  St.  John,  Treasurer, 
Mr.  Sewall  and  a  number  of  others.  The  weather  being  very  warm 
we  were  quite  fatigued  by  the  journey  and  went  at  once  to  Mr.  St. 
John's  residence  on  Thirty-Fourth  street. 


CHAPTER  XX. 


AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

THE  next  day  was  spent  in  resting  and  getting  my  speech  into 
print.  So  much  was  said  at  the  time  about  the  Madison 
Square  Garden  meeting  that  I  need  only  refer  to  it  briefly. 
Before  the  hour  appointed  for  the  notification  exercises,  the  hall, 
which  had  been  tastefully  decorated,  was  filled  to  its  utmost  capacity 
and  more  were  on  the  outside  than  were  able  to  secure  tickets  of  ad- 
mission. Hon.  Elliott  Danforth,  the  New  York  member  of  the  Notifi- 
cation Committee  and,  during  the  campaign,  chairman  of  the  New 
York  State  Committee,  presided  at  the  meeting  and  delivered  a  brief 
address  of  welcome.  In  the  absence  of  Senator  White,  Governor  Wil- 
liam J.  Stone,  of  Missouri,  delivered  the  letter  of  notification,  preceding 
the  delivery  of  the  speech  which  will  be  found  below. 

Mr.  Stone^s  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman:  We  are  here  this  evening  to  give  formal  notice  of  their 
selection  to  the  gentlemen  nominated  by  the  National  Democratic  Convention 
as  candidates  for  President  and  Vice-President  of  the  United  States.  Hitherto, 
by  immemorial  custom,  the  pleasing  duty  of  delivering  notifications  of  this 
character  has  devolved  upon  the  permanent  chairman  of  the  National  Con- 
vention acting,  by  virtue  of  his  office,  as  chairman  of  the  Notification  Commit- 
tee. Except  for  unfortunate  circumstances,  unexpected  and  unavoidable,  the 
usual  custom  would  not  be  departed  from  in  the  present  instance.  I  regret  to 
say,  however,  that  unforeseen  events  of  a  personal  nature  have  arisen  which  make 
it  practically  impossible  for  the  chairman  of  the  convention,  the  Hon.  Stephen 
M.  White,  of  California,  to  be  in  New  York  at  this  time.  A  few  days  since 
he  telegraphed  me  to  that  effect,  and  did  me  the  honor  to  request  me  to  repre- 
sent him  on  this  occasion.  While  I  greatly  appreciate  the  compliment  con- 
ferred by  this  designation,  I  can  not  but  deplore  the  enforced  absence  of  the 
distinguished  Senator  from  California,  and  I  am  directed  by  him  to  express  his 
deep  regret  at  his  inability  to  be  present  and  participate  in  the  interesting 
ceremonies  of  this  hour. 

Mr.  Chairman,  the  convention  which  assembled  at  Chicago  on  the  7th  day 
of  July  last  was  convened  in  the  usual  way,  under  a  call  issued  in  due  form 
by  the  National  Democratic  Committee.  There  was  nothing  out  of  the  or- 
dinary in  the  manner  of  its  assembling,  and  nothing  in  the  action  of  the 
committee  under  whose  authority  it  was  convoked  to  distinguish  it  from  its 
predecessors.  It  was  in  all  respects  a  regular  national  convention  of  the 
Democratic  party.     Every  State  and  Territory  in  the  Union,   from  Maine  to 

307 


308  A  T  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

Alaska,  was  represented  by  a  full  quota  of  delegates,  and  I  may  add  with 
perfect  truth  that  a  more  intelligent  and  thoroughly  representative  body  of 
Democrats  was  never  assembled  upon  the  American  continent.  The  con- 
vention was  called  for  two  purposes:  First,  to  formulate  a  platform  declar- 
atory of  party  principles,  and,  secondly,  to  nominate  candidates  for  President 
and  Vice-President  of  the  United  States.  Both  these  purposes  were  fully 
accomplished,  and  accomplished  according  to  the  usages  that  have  been  rec- 
ognized and  the  methods  of  procedure  which  have  obtained  in  Democratic 
conventions  for  fifty  years.  The  acts  of  the  convention,  therefore,  were 
the  acts  of  the  Democratic  party.  Its  work  was  done  under  the  sovereign 
authority  of  the  national  organization;  and  that  work  was  the  direct  out- 
growth of  the  calm,  well-matured  judgment  of  the  people  themselves,  delib- 
erately expressed  through  their  representatives  chosen  from  among  the  wisest, 
most  trusted,  and  patriotic  of  their  fellow  citizens  in  all  the  States. 

Although  all  I  have  said  is  literally  true,  yet  the  fact  remains,  of  which 
every  one  is  conscious,  that  there  were  extraneous  circumstances  leading  up 
to  the  convention  which  attracted  unusual  attention  to  its  deliberations  and  in- 
vested them  with  unusual  importance.  To  such  an  extent  was  this  true  that 
I  may  say  without  exaggeration  that  no  other  political  convention  has  been 
assembled  in  this  country  since  the  civil  war  upon  which  public  attention 
was  riveted  with  such  intensity,  or  in  the  outcome  of  whose  deliberations 
not  only  the  American  people  but  the  nations  of  the  earth  felt  such  deep 
concern.  We  are  all  familiar  with  the  circumstances  to  which  I  refer. 
The  existing  national  administration  was  created  by  the  Democratic  party. 
It  is  the  result  of  the  great  victory  won  in  1892.  The  campaign  of  that  year 
was  fought  almost  wholly  on  the  tariff  issue.  It  was  a  war  waged  against 
the  excessive,  monopolistic,  trust-breeding  schedules  of  the  McKinley  law. 
The  Democratic  party  was  united  almost  as  one  man  against  that  law,  and 
thousands  of  those  who  believed  in  the  policy  of  protection  when  conserv- 
atively administered  for  the  public  good  and  not  for  private  enrichment,  pro- 
tested against  this  monstrous  measure  of  extortion  for  individual  and  cor- 
porate emolument.  Opposition  to  the  McKinley  law  was  the  dominant  issue 
of  that  campaign,  and  the  measure  was  condemned  by  an  overwhelming 
majority  of  the  American  people.  But,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  desire  to  say  that 
although  the  tariflf  was  made  the  issue  of  1892,  there  were  thousands  of 
Democrats  v/ho  then  believed  that  a  reform  in  our  monetary  system  was 
of  far  greater  importance  than  a  reform  in  our  revenue  policies.  I  was 
among  those  who  so  believed.  Those  holding  to  that  belief  did  not  in  any 
degree  underestimate  the  importance  of  the  tariflf  issue — on  the  contrary,  its 
importance  was  fully  appreciated — but  they  believed  nevertheless  that  the 
control  of  our  fiscal  aflfairs  by  a  mercenary  combination  of  Wall  street 
bankers,  dominated  by  foreign  influences,  was  more  perilous  to  national 
safety  and  more  pernicious  in  its  eflfect  on  national  prosperity  than  all  the 
tariffs  the  miserly  hand  of  gluttonous  greed  could  write.  However,  we 
acquiesced  in  the  decision  of  our  party  convention,  accepted  the  issue  as 
made,  and  as  one  man  rallied  with  loyalty  and  alacrity  to  the  standard  of 
revenue  reform.  We  rejoiced  in  Mr.  Cleveland's  election,  and  confidently 
expected,  as  we  had  a  right  to,  that  he  would  bring  the  tariff  question  to  a 


A  T  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  309 

speedy  settlement  and  strip  monopoly  of  its  opportunity  to  plunder  the 
people.  But  in  this  just  expectation  we  were  doomed  to  disappointment. 
Instead  of  devoting  himself  to  a  prompt  and  wise  solution  of  the  important 
issue  upon  which  he  was  elected,  he  incontinently  thrust  it  aside  and  began, 
almost  at  the  threshold  of  his  administration,  to  exercise  the  great  powers 
of  his  ofifice  to  commit  the  country  to  a  financial  system  inaugurated  by  the 
Republican  party,  and  which  the  Democratic  party  had  time  and  again  con- 
demned in  both  State  and  national  conventions.  In  the  beginning  of  this 
attempt  the  masses  of  the  people,  disappointed  and  distressed,  looked  on  in 
amazement.  With  absorbing  interest  and  with  constantly  increasing  resent- 
ment they  watched  the  rapid  development  of  events.  As  these  events  passed 
before  them  one  by  one  in  quick  succession,  and  when  they  came  to  under- 
stand their  full  meaning  and  effect,  resentment  turned  to  wrath  and  protest 
rose  into  revolt.  Then  began  within  the  Democratic  party  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  struggles  that  have  ever  occurred  in  the  political  history  of  this 
country.  It  was  a  struggle  for  mastery  between  the  national  administration 
and  the  great  masses  of  plain  people,  who  constitute  the  party  which  created 
that  administration.  The  prize  they  fought  for  was  the  national  convention. 
That  convention  was  to  determine  whether  the  Democratic  party  should 
abide  by  the  traditions  of  the  fathers  and  adhere  to  its  ancient  faith,  or 
whether  it  should  obsequiously  abandon  the  principles  of  true  Democracy  and 
become  a  pliant  agent  to  advance  the  mercenary  ends  of  an  insolent  plutoc- 
racy. The  people  won.  They  won  a  glorious  victory.  The  full  significance 
of  their  triumph  can  not  be  estimated  at  a  glance.  Suppose  they  had  lost, 
what  then?  Suppose  the  Chicago  convention  had  followed  the  servile  example 
of  the  Republican  convention,  what  then?  If  that  had  happened  what  hue 
would  the  skies  now  reveal  to  the  uplifted  eyes  of  anxious  millions?  Would  the 
star  of  hope  then  have  risen  luminous  to  the  meridian  or  have  fallen  with  wan- 
ing light  upon  a  clouded  horizon?  Upon  what  staff  would  the  toiling  millions 
in  field  and  shop  then  have  rested  their  tired  hands?  What  bulwark  of  defense 
would  then  have  stood  between  the  great  industrial  and  producing  classes,  who 
constitute  the  solid  strength  and  safety  of  the  State,  and  the  combined 
aggressions  of  foreign  money-changers  and  anglicized  American  millionaires? 
Upon  what  rock  would  the  defenders  of  the  Constitution,  the  champions  of 
American  ideas  and  the  friends  of  American  institutions  have  then  anchored 
their  hopes  for  the  future?  The  paramount  question  before  the  country  was 
and  is — Shall  this  great  Republic  confess  financial  servitude  to  England,  or 
agt  independently  for  itself?  Shall  this  Government  follow,  or  shall  it  lead? 
Shall  it  be  a  vassal  or  a  sovereign?  The  Republican  convention  declared 
for  foreign  supremacy — for  American  subserviency.  It  upheld  the  British 
policy  of  a  single  gold  standard,  fraudulently  fastened  upon  this  country,  and 
declared  that  we  are  utterly  incapable  of  maintaining  an  independent  policy 
of  our  own.  Confessing  that  the  gold  standard  is  fraught  with  evil  to  our 
people,  and  that  bimetallism  is  best  for  this  nation  and  for  the  world,  it  yet 
declared  that  we  are  helpless — that  we  must  stand  idle,  while  our  industries 
are  prostrated  and  our  people  ruined,  until  England  shall  consent  for  us  to 
lift  our  hands  in  our  own  defense.  To  this  low  state  has  Mammon  brought 
the    great    party    of   the    immortal    Lincoln.     For   years    plutocracy   has   been 


310  AT  MAD/SON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

winding  its  slimy  and  poisonous  coils  around  the  Republican  party,  and  it 
will  strangle  it  to  death  as  the  sea  serpents  of  old  strangled  the  Trojan 
priest  of  Neptune  and  his  sons.  So  also  it  laid  its  foul,  corroding  hand  on 
the  Democratic  party — the  party  of  JefTcrson  and  Jackson — and  used  all  its 
giant  strength  to  bend  it  to  its  purposes.  Within  both  parties  there  was  a 
mighty  struggle  for  supremacy  between  those  who  believe  in  the  sovereignty 
of  the  people  and  those  who  believe  in  the  divinity  of  pelf.  Upon  the  Repub- 
lican party  the  hand  of  Marcus  Aurelius  Hanna  has  buckled  a  golden  mail 
and  sent  it  forth  dedicated  to  the  service  of  plutocracy  in  this  free  land 
of  ours.  But  in  the  Democratic  party,  thank  God,  the  people  were  triumphant. 
There  the  clutch  of  the  money  power,  after  a  tremendous  conflict,  was  broken. 
The  priests  of  Mammon  were  scourged  from  the  temple,  and  today,  under  the 
providence  of  high  heaven,  the  old  party,  rejuvenated,  stands  forth,  stronger  and 
better  than  ever,  the  undaunted  champion  of  constitutional  liberty,  popular 
rights,  and  national  independence.  The  gage  of  battle  thrown  down  at 
St.  Louis  was  taken  up  at  Chicago.  Against  English  ideas  we  place  American 
ideas;  against  an  English  policy  we  place  an  American  policy;  against  foreign 
domination  we  place  American  independence;  and  against  the  selfish  control  of 
privileged  classes  we  place  the  sovereignty  of  the  people.  The  Republican 
platform  is  the  antithesis  of  the  Democratic  platform.  One  stands  for  gold 
monometallism,  the  other  for  gold  and  silver  bimetallism.  One  proposes  that 
we  wait  upon  other  nations;  the  other  that  we  act  for  ourselves.  One  proposes 
that  the  Government  shall  lean  upon  the  bankers  of  New  York  and  London;  the 
other  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  stand  erect,  confident  and  fearless, 
and  assert  his  power  to  protect  the  rights  of  the  people  and  the  honor  of  the 
Nation.  One  proposes  to  continue  the  policy  of  issuing  bonds,  the  other  to 
stop  it.  One  declares  for  a  European  alliance,  the  other  is  a  declaration  for 
American  independence.  Upon  these  all-important  questions  issue  is  joined  be- 
tween the  two  great  political  parties  of  the  Republic.  Certainly  there  are  other 
things  of  moment  in  which  the  people  feel  profound  concern,  but  of  all  questions 
in  the  current  political  affairs  of  this  day  and  generation  the  financial  question 
rises  to  such  supreme  importance  that  all  other  subjects  are  practically  excluded 
from  present  consideration.  The  Chicago  convention  declared  in  so  many  words 
that  until  this  great,  paramount  issue  was  definitely  settled,  and  settled 
right,  the  consideration  of  all  other  questions,  upon  which  the  people  are 
seriously  divided,  should  be  postponed,  or  at  least  not  pressed  upon  public  or 
legislative  attention.  Around  this  one  supreme  issue  the  great  battle  of  1896 
is  to  be  fought.  For  the  first  time  it  has  been  fairly  presented,  without 
evasion  or  disguise.  Both  parties  have  taken  position  boldly.  Both  are  con- 
fident and  defiant.  Between  them  the  American  people  are  the  arbiters,  and 
as  such  they  are  now  to  pass  judgment  upon  the  most  important  question  pre- 
sented to  them  since  the  storm  of  civil  war  wrecked  happy  homes  and 
left  its  bloody  trail  upon  the  land.  They  are  to  pass  judgment  upon  a  question 
which  I  profoundly  believe  affects,  as  no  other  question  can,  not  only  the  present 
happiness  and  prosperity  of  the  people,  but  the  felicity  of  their  children,  the  per- 
petuity of  American  institutions,  and  the  well-being  of  all  mankind. 

Mr.  Chairman,  in  all  great  movements,  in  all  concerted  eflfort,  when  well 
directed,  there  must  be  leadership.     A  leader  should  be  representative  of  the 


AT  MAD/SON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  31 1 

cause  he  champions.  He  should  be  more  than  that— he  should  be  in  all  essen- 
tial qualities,  and  in  the  highest  degree,  typical  of  those  who  invest  him  with 
the  dignity  and  responsibility  of  leadership. 

The  Chicago  platform  has  been  denounced  as  un-Democratic  and  the  dele- 
gates composing  the  convention  have  been  stigmatized  as  anarchists  and 
socialists.  We  have  heard  much  of  this  from  a  certain  class  of  papers  and 
individuals.  On  Saturday  last  in  my  own  State  an  ex-Democratic,  ex- 
Supreme  Court  Judge  characterized  the  Chicago  platform  as  "a  bundle  of 
Populistic  notions,  saturated  brimful  with  socialism  and  anarchy,"  and  at 
the  same  time  an  ex-Democratic  corporation  attorney  of  some  distinction  de- 
clared that  American  citizenship  meant  government  "not  by  the  unthinking, 
unheeding  masses,  but  by  the  elements  which  are  guided  by  judgment  and 
reason."  "Unthinking,  unheeding  masses"  is  very  good.  "The  elements  which 
are  guided  by  judgment  and  reason"  is  extra  good.  It  is  at  least  a  slight  modi- 
fication of  Vanderbilt's  arrogant  anathema,  "Damn  the  people,"  and  for  this 
small  concession  we  ought  no  doubt  to  be  duly  grateful.  Who  composed  the 
Chicago  convention?  From  the  State  in  which  reside  the  gentlemen  from  whom 
I  have  quoted,  the  delegation  sent  to  that  convention  was  composed  of  farmers, 
lawyers,  doctors,  editors,  merchants,  manufacturers,  and  several  of  the  most 
conspicuously  successful  business  men  in  the  Mississippi  Valley.  Among  them 
also  were  eminent  judges  of  high  courts.  Senators  of  the  United  States,  Repre- 
sentatives in  Congress,  and  the  Treasurer  and  Governor  of  the  State.  That 
delegation  was  chosen  by  one  of  the  greatest  conventions  ever  assembled  in  that 
State,  representing  all  classes  of  the  very  best  people  of  the  Commonwealth. 
What  was  true  of  Missouri  was  equally  true  of  all  the  States.  If  these  men 
could  not  speak  for  the  Democratic  party,  who  could?  If  these  men  do  not 
understand  Democracy,  who  are  its  exponents?  But  these  are  the  men  who  are 
ridiculed  as  an  unthinking,  unheeding  mob,  who  can  not  be  trusted  in  the 
conduct  of  public  affairs,  and  these  are  the  men  who  must  give  way  to  English 
toadies  and  the  pampered  minions  of  corporate  rapacity,  who  arrogate  to 
themselves  all  the  virtues  and  wisdom  of  the  world!  Sir,  the  man  who  holds 
up  to  opprobrium  such  men  as  constituted  the  Chicago  convention,  who  de- 
nounces them  as  cranks,  anarchists,  or  socialists,  or  who  in  any  respect  impugns 
their  intelligence  or  patriotism,  does  himself  most  rank  injustice  if  he  be  not  a 
knave,  a  slanderer,  or  a  fool.  That  convention  did  indeed  represent  the 
"masses"  of  the  people — the  great  industrial  and  producing  masses  of  the 
people.  It  represented  the  men  who  plow  and  plant,  who  fatten  herds,  who  toil 
in  shops,  who  fell  forests,  and  delve  in  mines.  But  are  these  to  be  regarded 
with  contumely  and  addressed  in  terms  of  contempt?  Why,  sir,  these  are 
the  men  who  feed  and  clothe  the  Nation;  whose  products  make  up  the  sum  of 
our  exports;  who  produce  the  wealth  of  the  Republic;  who  bear  the  heaviest 
burdens  in  times  of  peace;  who  are  ready  always  to  give  their  life-blood  for 
their  country's  flag — in  short,  these  are  the  men  whose  sturdy  arms  and  faithful 
hands  uphold  the  stupendous  fabric  of  our  civilization.  They  are  the  bravest 
and  the  tenderest,  the  truest  and  the  best.  These  are  the  men  who  spoke  at 
Chicago  in  tones  that  rang  out  clear,  and  high,  and  strong.  They  were  in 
earnest,  and  did  not  mean  to  be  misunderstood.  It  was  the  voice  of  true 
Democracy.     It  was  also  the  voice  of  deep  conviction,  spoken  without  fear. 


312  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

They  demanded  what  they  want,  and  they  mean  to  have  it.  They  did  not  go  to 
Wall  street  for  their  principles,  nor  over  the  sea  for  their  inspiration.  Their 
principles  were  inherited  from  the  fathers  and  their  inspiration  sprang  from  an 
unconquerable  love  of  country  and  of  home. 

For  a  leader  they  chose  one  of  their  own — a  plain  man  of  the  people.  His 
whole  life  and  life  work  identify  him,  in  sympathy  and  interest,  with  those  who 
represent  the  great  industrial  forces  of  the  country.  Among  them  he  was 
born  and  reared,  and  has  lived  and  wrought  all  the  days  of  his  life.  To  their 
cause  he  has  devoted  all  the  splendid  powers  with  which  God  endowed  him. 
He  has  been  their  constant  and  fearless  champion.  They  know  him,  and  they 
trust  him.  Suave,  yet  firm;  gentle,  yet  dauntless;  warm-hearted,  yet  deliberate; 
confident  and  self-poised,  but  without  vanity;  learned  in  books  and  statecraft, 
but  without  pedantry  or  pretense;  a  superb  orator,  yet  a  man  of  the  greatest 
caution  and  method;  equipped  with  large  experience  in  public  affairs,  true  to 
his  convictions,  true  to  himself,  and  false  to  no  man,  William  J.  Bryan  is  a 
model  American  gentleman  and  a  peerless  leader  of  the  people.  This  man  is 
our  leader.  Under  his  banner  and  guided  by  his  wisdom  we  will  go  forth  to 
conquer.  Let  us  rally  everywhere,  on  hilltops  and  in  the  valleys,  and  strike 
for  homes,  our  loved  ones,  and  our  native  land.  I  have  no  doubt  of  victory. 
It  is  as  sure  to  come  as  the  rising  of  the  sun.  And  it  will  come  like  a  sunburst, 
scattering  the  mists,  and  the  Nation,  exultant  and  happy,  will  leap  forward  like 
a  giant  refreshed  to  that  high  destiny  it  was  designed  to  accomplish.  This 
man  will  be  President.  His  administration  will  be  a  shining  epoch  in  our 
history,  for  he  will  leave  behind  him  a  name  made  illustrious  by  great  achieve- 
ments, and  by  deeds  that  will  embalm  him  forever  in  the  hearts  and  memory 
of  his  countrymen. 

Mr.  Bryan,  I  esteem  it  a  great  honor,  as  it  is  most  certainly  a  pleasure, 
to  be  made  the  instrument  of  informing  you,  as  I  now  do,  that  you  were  nomi- 
nated for  the  office  of  President  of  the  United  States  by  the  Democratic  Na- 
tional Convention  which  assembled  in  Chicago  in  July  last.  I  hand  you  this 
formal  notice  of  your  nomination,  accompanied  by  a  copy  of  the  platform 
adopted-  by  the  convention,  and  upon  that  platform  I  have  the  honor  to 
request  your  acceptance  of  the  nomination  tendered.  You  are  the  candidate 
of  the  Democratic  party,  but  you  are  more  than  that — you  are  the  candidate 
of  all  the  people,  without  regard  to  party,  who  believe  in  the  purposes  your 
election  is  intended  to  accomplish.  This  battle  must  be  fought  upon  ground 
high  above  the  level  of  partisanship.  I  hope  to  see  you  unfurl  the  flag  in  the 
name  of  America  and  American  manhood.  In  saying  this  I  but  repeat  the 
expressed  wish  of  the  convention  which  nominated  you.  Do  this,  and  though 
you  will  not  have  millions  of  money  at  your  command,  you  will  have  millions 
of  sturdy  Americans  at  your  back.  Lead  on,  and  we  will  follow.  Who  will 
not  follow  here  is  unworthy. to  lead  in  any  cause.  Lead  on  with  unfaltering 
step,  and  may  God's  blessing  attend  you  and  His  omnipotent  hand  crown  you 
with  success. 


AT  MAD/SON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  313 

The  following  is 

The  Letter  of  Notification. 
William  J.  Bryan,  Nebraska. 

The  National  Democratic  Convention  which  convened  in  Chicago  on  July 
7th  nominated  you  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States  and  we,  as  members 
of  the  Notification  Committee,  appointed  by  that  convention,  are  here  to  offi- 
cially inform  you  of  the  action  thus  taken. 

The  circumstances  attending  your  nomination  cannot  but  afford  you  unqual- 
ified satisfaction,  and  must  inspire  enthusiasm  throughout  our  country.  You 
were  selected  by  no  clique,  nor  were  you  chosen  as  the  result  of  any  question- 
able combination.  Those  who  nominated  you  were  law-abiding,  determined 
and  honest  representatives  of  their  countrymen,  and  preferred  you  because 
of  your  exalted  integrity,  patriotism  and  ability.  You  are  ripe  in  experience 
and  judgment,  in  the  prime  of  manhood,  and  enjoy  the  mental  and  physical 
characteristics  essential  to  the  great  work  which  you  have  been  required  to 
undertake.  You  have  been  tried  in  public  station.  You  have  always  done 
your  entire  duty. 

While  you  are  a  Democrat  and  have,  during  your  political  career,  been  an 
ardent  advocate  of  Democratic  principles,  you  are  now  the  official  head  of  an 
organization,  comprising  not  only  those  who  have  hitherto  been  Democrats, 
but  also  including  within  its  membership  numerous  other  patriotic  Americans 
who  have  abandoned  their  former  partisan  associations,  finding  in  our  plat- 
form and  candidate  a  policy  and  leadership  adequate  to  save  the  Republic  from 
impending  danger. 

Your  conduct  has  been  such  that  you  can,  in  this  crisis,  without  doing 
violence  to  any  opinions  heretofore  expressed,  advocate  the  interests  of  the 
people.  The  profound  satisfaction  which  we  experience  at  your  candidacy 
is  of  minor  importance  when  compared  with  the  knowledge  that  your  election 
means  the  maintenance  of  an  honest  government,  administered  for  the  benefit 
of  all  and  controlled  only  by  intelligence  conscientiously  directed. 

The  conflict  now  upon  us  has  for  years  been  foreshadowed.  Its  impor- 
tance cannot  be  questioned.  The  prevalence  within  party  lines  of  vitally  diver- 
gent views,  especially  upon  financial  issues,  has  long  been  apparent.  The  vain 
hope  has  been  indulged  that  fortuitous  circumstances  would  develop  condi- 
tions rendering  definite  action  unnecessary.  Unmeaning  platforms,  words 
susceptible  of  interpretation  according  to  the  preference  of  the  speaker  or  audit- 
or, have  been  employed  by  the  political  parties  of  the  United  States.  Supposed 
expediency  has  prevented  the  use  of  plain  and  positive  language  until  political 
duplicity  has  excited  universal  distrust.  In  this  campaign  the  Republican  party 
pledges  its  adherents  to  the  gold  standard  and  commits  the  destiny  of  the 
United  States  to  the  keeping  of  foreign  financial  syndicates  and  their  agents 
here,  and  rests  confident  in  the  belief  that  the  sordid  selfishness  by  which  it  is 
controlled,  cannot  be  overcome.  Its  platform  admits  the  evils  of  a  gold  stand- 
ard, but  confesses  the  party's  inability  to  afford  relief  and  announces  supine 
submission  to  a  policy  which  pretends  to  condemn.  Patriotic  courage  is  more 
than  a  reminiscence.  The  Democratic  party  declines  the  unmanly  suggestion 
that  the  people  of  the  United  States  cannot  escape  oppression  save  at  the  will 


314  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

of  the  oppressor.  Its  declaration  of  principles  not  only  evinces  faith  in  the 
bimetallism  of  the  Constitution,  but  proclaims  that  this  Government  is  com- 
petent to  declare  and  maintain  its  own  policy  without  reference  to  the  caprices 
or  wishes  of  any  other  power.  It  denounces  as  un-American  the  theory  that  we 
are  not  independent  in  matters  financial,  and  contends  that  there  cannot  be 
any  freedom  here  if  fiscal  policies  are  to  be  dictated  from  abroad.  To  doubt 
your  election  is  to  deny  the  manhood  of  our  electors,  to  concede  that  the  pro- 
ducers of  the  United  States,  those  who  toil,  those  who  add  to  the  wealth  of  the 
land,  will  vote  to  perpetuate  alien  dominancy,  and  will  permit  the  continuance 
of  a  policy  pauperizing  and  demeaning,  is  to  assume,  in  the  face  of  conclusive 
proof  to  the  contrary,  ignorance  and  degradation. 

We  are  convinced  that  victory  awaits  the  people  and  their  just  cause  and 
assure  you  of  the  earnest  support  of  an  overwhelming  majority  of  your  fellow 
citizens.     We  are,  sir,  respectfully, 

Stephen  M.  White,  of  California,  Chairman. 

Stephen  M.  White,  California,  chairman;  J.  J.  Willette,  Alabama; 
Charles  S.  Collins,  Arkansas;  J.  J.  Dwyer,  California;  T.  J.  O'Don- 
nell,  Colorado;  William  Kennedy,  Connecticut;  J.  F.  Saulsbury,  Del- 
aware; G.  B.  Sparkman,  Florida;  J.  T.  Hill,  Georgia;  D.  S.  Hillard, 
Idaho;  William  H.  Green,  Illinois;  U.  S.  Jackson,  Indiana;  L.  T. 
Genung,  Iowa;  Frank  Bacon,  Kansas;  John  E.  Garner,  Kentucky; 
Victor  Maubarret,  Louisiana;  Fred  W.  Plaisted,  Maine;  John  Hanni- 
bal, Maryland;  James  Donovan,  Massachusetts;  F.  W.  Hubbard  and 
William  F.  McKnight,  Michigan;  B.  F.  Voreis,  Minnesota;  R.  H. 
Henry,  Mississippi;  Hugh  J.  Brady,  Missouri;  Paul  A.  Fusz,  Montana; 
John  A.  Creighton,  Nebraska;  Jacob  Klein,  Nevada;  Herbert  J.  Jones, 
New  Hampshire;  William  V.  Del,  New  Jersey;  Elliott  Danforth,  New 
York;  P.  N.  Pearson,  North  Carolina;  W.  N.  Roach,  North  Dakota; 
L.  E.  Holden,  Ohio;  Charles  Nickell,  Oregon;  J.  N.  Garman,  Penn- 
sylvania; George  W.  Greene,  Rhode  Island;  E.  P.  McSweeney,  South 
Carolina;  S.  V.  Arnold,  South  Dakota;  John  K.  Shields,  Tennessee; 
J.  L.  Shepard,  Texas;  Fred  J.  Kissel,  Utah;  RoUin  Childs,  Vermont; 
T.  M.  Murphy,  Virginia ;  James  F.  Girton,  Washington ;  L.  E.  Tierney, 
West  Virginia;  James  E.  Malone,  Wisconsin;  M.  L,  Blake,  Wyoming; 
W.  E.  Jones,  Arizona;  Charles  D.  Rogers,  Alaska;  George  Killeen, 
District  of  Columbia;  D.  M.  Haley,  Indian  Territory;  Demetrius 
Chaves,  New  Mexico;  L.  G.  Niblack,  Oklahoma. 

Following  the  determination  referred  to  in  a  former  letter,  I  read 
the  speech,  only  laying  the  manuscript  aside  when  near  the  conclu- 
sion. The  delivery  was  a  disappointment  to  those  present,  as  I  knew 
it  would  be.     The  World,  speaking  of  it  the  next  morning,  said: 

To  put  it  in  blunt,  sincere  language,  the  great  Bryan  demonstration  at  the 
Madison  Square  Garden  was  a  disappointment.     Mr.  Bryan  read  a  speech  tern- 


A  T  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  3 1 5 

pered  in  tone,  and  beautifully  phrased,  but  failed  to  fire  the  great  multitude 
who  came  to  see  and  hear  him.  When  the  young  orator  rose  to  speak  the 
temperature  in  the  building  was  97  degrees  Fahrenheit,  but  before  he  finished 
the  thermometer  showed  a  fall  of  two  degrees. 

The  Journal,  though  giving  a  more  friendly  account  of  the  recep- 
tion accorded  the  speech,  said: 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  audience  was  disappointed  in  the  circumstance 
that  Mr.  Bryan  read  his  speech.  Nevertheless,  he  was  listened  to  with  the 
deepest  attention  and  the  salient  points  of  the  speech  were  received  with  tumul- 
tuous applause. 

The  reading  of  the  speech  was  much  discussed  in  both  a  serious 
and  a  comic  vein  by  the  opposition  papers.  The  incident  gave  rise 
to  a  number  of  cuts  and  caricatures,  one  of  the  best  of  which  repre- 
sented me  as  a  boy,  reading  a  long  roll  of  manuscript,  while  father 
Knickerbocker  was  returning  to  his  house  with  a  complacent  look 
upon  his  face  and  a  fire  extinguisher  under  his  arm.  Beneath  the 
picture  were  the  significant  words,  "A  false  alarm."  Many  who  at 
the  time  doubted  the  propriety  of  reading  the  speech  afterwards  com- 
mended the  course  pursued.  The  Journal  came  to  my  defense  and 
showed  that  Abraham  Lincoln  had  followed  the  same  course  when  he 
made  his  New  York  speech  prior  to  the  campaign  of  i860.  The  accept- 
ance speech,  which  was  afterwards  used  as  a  campaign  document,  is 
given  in  full. 

Madison  Square  Garden  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Gentlemen  of  the  Committee  and  Fellow  Citizens:  I 
shall,  at  a  future  day  and  in  a  formal  letter,  accept  the  nomination  which 
is  now  tendered  by  the  Notification  Committee,  and  I  shall  at  that  time 
touch  upon  the  issues  presented  by  the  platform.  It  is  fitting,  however, 
that  at  this  time,  in  the  presence  of  those  here  assembled,  I  speak  at  some 
length  in  regard  to  the  campaign  upon  which  we  are  now  entering.  We  do  not 
underestimate  the  forces  arrayed  against  us,  nor  are  we  unmindful  of  the 
importance  of  the  struggle  in  which  we  are  engaged;  but,  relying  for  success 
upon  the  righteousness  of  our  cause,  we  shall  defend  with  all  possible  vigor  the 
positions  taken  by  our  party.  We  are  not  surprised  that  some  of  our  opponents, 
in  the  absence  of  better  argument,  resort  to  abusive  epithets,  but  they  may  rest 
assured  that  no  language,  however  violent,  no  invectives,  however  vehement, 
will  lead  us  to  depart  a  single  hair's  breadth  from  the  course  marked  out  by  the 
National  Convention.  The  citizen,  either  public  or  private,  who  assails  the 
character  and  questions  the  patriotism  of  the  delegates  assembled  in  the  Chicago 
convention,  assails  the  character  and  questions  the  patriotism  of  the  millions 
who  have  arrayed  themselves  under  the  banner  there  raised. 

It  has  been  charged  by  men  standing  high  in  business  and  political  circles 
that  our  platform  is  a  menace  to  private  security  and  public  safety;  and  it  has 
been  asserted  that  those  whom  I  have  the  honor  for  the  time  being,  to  represent, 


316  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

not  only  meditate  an  attack  upon  the  rights  of  property,  but  are  the  foes  both  of 
social  order  and  national  honor. 

Those  who  stand  upon  the  Chicago  platform  are  prepared  to  make  known  and 
to  defend  every  motive  which  influences  them,  every  purpose  which  animates  them, 
and  every  hope  which  inspires  them.  They  understand  the  genius  of  our  institu- 
tions, they  are  staunch  supporters  of  the  form  of  government  under  which  we  live, 
and  they  build  their  faith  upon- foundations  laid  by  the  fathers.  Andrew  Jackson 
has  stated,  with  admirable  clearness  and  with  an  emphasis  which  cannot  be 
surpassed,  both  the  duty  and  the  sphere  of  government.    He  said: 

Distinctions  in  society  will  always  exist  under  every  Just  government.  Kquallty  of 
talents,  of  education  or  of  wealth,  cannot  be  produced  by  human  institutions.  In  the  full 
enjoyment  of  the  gifts  of  Heaven  and  the  fruits  of  superior  industry,  economy  and 
virtue,  every  man  is  equally  entitled  to  protection  by  law. 

We  yield  to  none  in  our  devotion  to  the  doctrine  just  enunciated.  Our 
campaign  has  not  for  its  object  the  reconstruction  of  society.  We  cannot 
insure  to  the  vicious  the  fruits  of  a  virtuous  life;  we  would  not  invade  the  home 
of  the  provident  in  order  to  supply  the  wants  of  the  spendthrift;  we  do  not 
propose  to  transfer  the  rewards  of  industry  to  the  lap  of  indolence.  Property 
is  and  will  remain  the  stimulus  to  endeavor  and  the  compensation  for  toil.  We 
believe,  as  asserted  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  that  all  men  are  created 
equal;  but  that  does  not  mean  that  all  men  are  or  can  be  equal  in  possessions, 
in  ability  or  in  merit;  it  simply  means  that  all  shall  stand  equal  before  the  law, 
and  that  government  officials  shall  not,  in  making,  construing  or  enforcing  the 
law,  discriminate  between  citizens. 

I  assert  that  property  rights,  as  well  as  the  rights  of  persons,  are  safe  in 
the  hands  of  the  common  people.  Abraham  Lincoln,  in  his  message  sent  to 
Congress  in  December,  1861,  said: 

No  men  living  are  more  worthy  to  be  trusted  than  those  who  toil  up  from  poverty; 
none  less  inclined  to  take  or  touch  aught  which  they  have  not  honestly  earned. 

I  repeat  his  language  with  unqualified  approval,  and  join  with  him  in  the 
warning  which  he  added,  namely: 

Let  them  beware  of  surrendering  a  political  power  which  they  already  possess, 
and  which  power,  if  surrendered,  will  surely  be  used  to  close  the  doors  of  advance- 
ment against  such  as  they,  and  to  fix  new  disabilities  and  burdens  upon  them,  till 
all   of   liberty   shall    be   lost. 

Those  who  daily  frllow  the  injunction,  "In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt 
thou  eat  bread,"  are  now,  as  they  ever  have  been,  the  bulwark  of  law  and  order — 
the  source  of  our  nation's  greatness  in  time  of  peace,  and  its  surest  defenders 
in  time  of  war. 

But  I  have  only  read  a  part  of  Jackson's  utterance — let  me  give  you  his 
conclusion: 

But  when  the  laws  undertake  to  add  to  those  natural  and  just  advantages  artif.clal 
distinctions— to  grant  titles,  gratuities  and  exclusive  privileges— to  make  the  rich  richer 
and  the  potent  more  powerful— the  humble  members  of  society— the  farmers,  me- 
chanics and  the  laborers— who  have  neither  the  time  nor  the  means  of  securing  like 
favors  for  themselves,  have  a  right  to  complain  of  the  injustice  of  their  government. 

Those  who  support  the  Chicago  platform  endorse  all  of  the  quotation  from 
Jackson — the  latter  part  as  well  as  the  former  part. 

We  are  not  surprised  to  find  arrayed  against  us  those  who  are  the  bene- 
ficiaries of  government  favoritism — they  have  read  our  platform.     Nor  are  we 


Jt     '^ 

^^gfl^^^^^^^^^^H^^^^^^^^^^-^^Hp^^w^S^^^^^^^H 

AT  Mad/son  square  garden.  3i^ 

surprised  to  learn  that  we  must  in  this  campaign  face  the  hostility  of  those  who 
find  a  pecuniary  advantage  in  advocating  the  doctrine  of  non-interference  when 
great  aggregations  of  wealth  are  trespassing  upon  the  rights  of  individuals.  We 
welcome  such  opposition — it  is  the  highest  endorsement  which  could  be  be- 
stowed upon  us.  We  are  content  to  have  the  co-operation  of  those  who  desire 
to  have  the  government  administered  without  fear  or  favor.  It  is  not  the  wish 
of  the  general  public  that  trusts  should  spring  into  existence  and  override  the 
weaker  members  of  society;  it  is  not  the  wish  of  the  general  public  that  these 
trusts  should  destroy  competition  and  then  collect  such  tax  as  they  will  from 
those  who  are  at  their  mercy;  nor  is  it  the  fault  of  the  general  public  that  the 
instrumentalities  of  government  have  been  so  often  prostituted  to  purposes  of 
private  gain.  Those  who  stand  upon  the  Chicago  platform  believe  that  the 
government  should  not  only  avoid  wrongdoing,  but  that  it  should  also  prevent 
wrongdoing;  and  they  believe  that  the  law  should  be  enforced  alike  against  all 
enemies  of  the  public  weal.  They  do  not  excuse  petit  larceny,  but  they  declare 
that  grand  larceny  is  equally  a  crime;  they  do  not  defend  the  occupation  of  the 
highwayman  who  robs  the  unsuspecting  traveler,  but  they  include  among  the 
transgressors  those  who,  through  the  more  polite  and  less  hazardous  means  of 
legislation,  appropriate  to  their  own  use  the  proceeds  of  the  toil  of  others.  The 
commandment,  "Thou  shalt  not  steal,"  thundered  from  Sinai  and  reiterated  in 
the  legislation  of  all  nations,  is  no  respecter  of  persons.  It  must  be  applied  to 
the  great  as  well  as  to  the  small;  to  the  strong  as  well  as  to  the  weak;  to  the 
corporate  person  created  by  law  as  well  as  to  the  person  of  flesh  and  blood 
created  by  the  Almighty.  No  government  is  worthy  of  the  name  which  is  not 
able  to  protect  from  every  arm  uplifted  for  his  injury  the  humblest  citizen  who 
lives  beneath  the  flag.  It  follows  as  a  necessary  conclusion  that  vicious  legisla- 
tion must  be  remedied  by  the  people  who  suffer  from  the  effects  of  such  legisla- 
tion, and  not  by  those  who  enjoy  its  benefits. 

The  Chicago  platform  has  been  condemned  by  some  because  it  dissents 
from  an  opinion  rendered  by  the  Supreme  Court  declaring  the  income  tax  law 
unconstitutional.  Our  critics  even  go  so  far  as  to  apply  the  name  anarchist 
to  those  who  stand  upon  that  plank  of  the  platform.  It  must  be  remembered 
that  we  expressly  recognize  the  binding  force  of  that  decision  so  long  as  it 
stands  as  a  part  of  the  law  of  the  land.  There  is  in  the  platform  no  suggestion 
of  an  attempt  to  dispute  the  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court.  The  party  is  sim- 
ply pledged  to  use  "all  the  constitutional  power  which  remains  after  that  de- 
cision, or  which  may  come  from  its  reversal  by  the  Court  as  it  may  hereafter 
be  constituted."  Is  there  any  disloyalty  in  that  pledge?  For  a  hundred  years 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  has  sustained  the  principle  which 
underlies  the  income  tax.  Some  twenty  years  ago  this  same  Court  sustained, 
without  a  dissenting  voice,  an  income  tax  law  almost  identical  with  the  one 
recently  overthrown.  Has  not  a  future  court  as  much  right  to  return  to  the 
judicial  precedents  of  a  century  as  the  present  Court  had  to  depart  from  them? 
When  courts  allow  rehearings  they  admit  that  error  is  possible;  the  late  decision 
against  the  income  tax  was  rendered  by  a  majority  of  one  after  a  rehearing. 

While  the  money  question  overshadows  all  other  questions  in  importance, 
I  desire  it  distinctly  understood  that  I  shall  offer  no  apology  for  the  income 
tax  plank  of  the  Chicago  platform.    The  last  income  tax  law  sought  to  appor- 

]3 


320  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

tion  the  burdens  of  government  more  equitably  among  those  who  enjoy  the 
protection  of  the  Government.  At  present  the  expenses  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, collected  through  internal  revenue  taxes  and  import  duties,  are  especially 
burdensome  upon  the  poorer  classes  of  society.  A  law  which  collects  from 
some  citizens  more  than  their  share  of  the  taxes  and  collects  from  other  citi- 
zens less  than  their  share  is  simply  an  indirect  means  of  transferring  one  man's 
property  to  another  man's  pocket,  and,  while  the  process  may  be  quite  satis- 
factory to  the  men  who  escape  just  taxation,  it  can  never  be  satisfactory  to 
those  who  are  overburdened.  The  last  income  tax  law,  with  its  exemption 
provisions,  when  considered  in  connection  with  other  methods  of  taxation  in 
force,  was  not  unjust  to  the  possessors  of  large  incomes,  because  they  were  not 
compelled  to  pay  a  total  Federal  tax  greater  than  their  share.  The  income  tax 
is  not  new,  nor  is  it  based  upon  hostility  to  the  rich.  The  system  is  employed 
in  several  of  the  most  important  nations  of  Europe,  and  every  income  tax 
law  now  upon  tTie  statute  books  in  any  land,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  ascer- 
tain, contains  an  exemption  clause.  While  the  collection  of  an  income  tax  in 
other  countries  does  not  make  it  necessary  for  this  Nation  to  adopt  the  system, 
yet  it  ought  to  moderate  the  language  of  those  who  denounce  the  income  tax 
as  an  assault  upon  the  well-to-do. 

Not  only  shall  I  refuse  to  apologize  for  the  advocacy  of  an  income  tax  law 
by  the  National  Convention,  but  I  shall  also  refuse  to  apologize  for  the  exercise 
by  it  of  the  right  to  dissent  from  a  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court.  In  a  gov- 
ernment like  ours  every  public  ofificial  is  a  public  servant,  whether  he  holds 
office  by  election  or  by  appointment,  whether  he  serves  for  a  term  of  years  or 
during  good  behavior,  and  the  people  have  a  right  to  criticise  his  official  acts. 
"Confidence  is  everywhere  the  parent  of  despotism;  free  government  exists  in 
jealousy  and  not  in  confidence" — these  are  the  words  of  Thomas  Jeflferson,  and 
I  submit  that  they  present  a  truer  conception  of  popular  government  than  that 
entertained  by  those  who  would  prohibit  an  unfavorable  comment  upon  a  court 
decision.  Truth  will  vindicate  itself;  only  error  fears  speech.  No  public 
ofificial  who  conscientiously  discharges  his  duty  as  he  sees  it  will  desire  to 
deny  to  those  whom  he  serves  the  right  to  discuss  his  official  conduct. 

Now  let  me  ask  you  to  consider  the  paramount  question  of  this  campaign — 
the  money  question.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  defend  the  principle  of  bimet- 
allism. No  national  party  during  the  entire  history  of  the  United  States  has 
ever  declared  against  it,  and  no  party  in  this  campaign  has  had  the  temerity 
to  oppose  it.  Three  parties — the  Democratic,  Populist,  and  Silver  parties — 
have  not  only  declared  for  bimetallism,  but  have  outlined  the  specific  legislation 
necessary  to  restore  silver  to  its  ancient  position  by  the  side  of  gold.  The 
Republican  platform  expressly  declares  that  bimetallism  is  desirable  when  it 
pledges  the  Republican  party  to  aid  in  securing  it  as  soon  as  the  assistance  of 
certain  foreign  nations  can  be  obtained.  Those  who  represented  the  minority 
sentiment  in  the  Chicago  Convention  opposed  the  free  coinage  of  silver  by  the 
United  States  by  independent  action,  on  the  ground  that,  in  their  judgment,  it 
"would  retard  or  entirely  prevent  the  establishment  of  international  bimetallism, 
to  which  the  efforts  of  the  Government  should  be  steadily  directed."  When 
they  asserted  that  the  efforts  of  the  Government  should  be  steadily  directed 
toward  the  establishment  of  international  bimetallism,  they  condemned  mono- 


AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  321 

metalHsm.  The  gold  standard  has  been  weighed  in  the  balance  and  found 
wanting.  Take  from  it  the  powerful  support  of  the  money-owning  and  the 
money-changing  classes  and  it  cannot  stand  for  one  day  in  any  nation  in  the 
world.  It  was  fastened  upon  the  United  States  without  discussion  before  the 
people,  and  its  friends  have  never  yet  been  willing  to  risk  a  verdict  before  the 
voters  upon  that  issue. 

There  can  be  no  sympathy  or  co-operation  between  the  advocates  of  a  uni- 
versal gold  standard  and  the  advocates  of  bimetallism.  Between  bimetallism — 
whether  independent  or  international — and  the  gold  standard  there  is  an  im- 
passable gulf.  Is  this  quadrennial  agitation  in  favor  of  international  bimetal- 
lism conducted  in  good  faith,  or  do  our  opponents  really  desire  to  maintain  the 
gold  standard  permanently?  Are  they  willing  to  confess  the  superiority  of  a 
double  standard  when  joined  in  by  the  leading  nations  of  the  world,  or  do  they 
still  insist  that  gold  is  the  only  metal  suitable  for  standard  money  among  civ- 
ilized nations?  If  they  are  in  fact  desirous  of  securing  bimetallism,  we  may 
expect  them  to  point  out  the  evils  of  a  gold  standard  and  defend  bimetallism  as 
a  system.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  they  are  bending  their  energies  toward  the 
permanent  establishment  of  a  gold  standard  under  cover  of  a  declaration  in 
favor  of  international  bimetallism,  I  am  justified  in  suggesting  that  honest 
money  cannot  be  expected  at  the  hands  of  those  who  deal  dishonestly  with 
the  American  people. 

What  is  the  test  of  honesty  in  money?  It  must  certainly  be  found  in  the 
purchasing  power  of  the  dollar.  An  absolutely  honest  dollar  would  not  vary 
in  its  general  purchasing  power;  it  would  be  absolutely  stable  when  measured 
by  average  prices.  A  dollar  which  increases  in  purchasing  power  is  just  as 
dishonest  as  a  dollar  which  decreases  in  purchasing  power.  Prof.  Laughlin, 
now  of  the  University  of  Chicago,  and  one  of  the  highest  gold-standafd  author- 
ities, in  his  work  on  bimetallism  not  only  admits  that  gold  does  not  remain 
absolutely  stable  in  value,  but  expressly  asserts  "that  there  is  no  such  thing 
as  a  standard  of  value  for  future  payments,  either  in  gold  or  silver,  which 
remains  absolutely  invariable."  He  even  suggests  that  a  multiple  standard, 
wherein  the  unit  is  "based  upon  the  selling  prices  of  a  number  of  articles  of 
general  consumption,"  would  be  a  more  just  standard  than  either  gold  or  silver, 
or  both,  because  "a  long  time  contract  would  thereby  be  paid  at  its  maturity 
by  the  same  purchasing  power  as  was  given  in  the  beginning." 

It  cannot  be  successfully  claimed  that  monometallism  or  bimetallism,  or 
any  other  system,  gives  an  absolutely  just  standard  of  value.  Under  both 
monometallism  and  bimetallism  the  Government  fixes  the  weight  and  fineness 
of  the  dollar,  invests  it  with  legal  tender  qualities,  and  then  opens  the  mints 
to  its  unrestricted  coinage,  leaving  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar  to  be 
determined  by  the  number  of  dollars.  Bimetallism  is  better  than  monometal- 
lism, not  because  it  gives  us  a  perfect  dollar — that  is,  a  dollar  absolutely  unvary- 
ing in  its  general  purchasing  power — but  because  it  makes  a  nearer  approach 
to  stability,  to  honesty,  to  justice,  than  a  gold  standard  possibly  can.  Prior  to 
1873,  when  there  were  enough  open  mints  to  permit  all  the  gold  and  silver 
available  for  coinage  to  find  entrance  into  the  world's  volume  of  standard 
money,  the  United  States  might  have  maintained  a  gold  standard  with  less 
injury  to  the  people  of  this  country;  but  now,  when  each  step  toward  a  universal 


322  A  T  MAD/SON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

gold  standard  enhances  the  purchasing  power  of  gold,  depresses  prices,  and 
transfers  to  the  pockets  of  the  creditor  class  an  unearned  increment,  the  influ- 
ence of  this  great  nation  must  not  be  thrown  upon  the  side  of  gold  unless  we 
are  prepared  to  accept  the  natural  and  legitimate  consequences  of  such  an  act. 
Any  legislation  which  lessens  the  world's  stock  of  standard  money  increases 
the  exchangeable  value  of  the  dollar;  therefore,  the  crusade  against  silver  must 
inevitably  raise  the  purchasing  power  of  money  and  lower  the  money  value  of 
all  other  forms  of  property. 

Our  opponents  sometimes  admit  that  it  was  a  mistake  to  demonetize  sil- 
ver, but  insist  that  we  should  submit  to  present  conditions  rather  than  return 
to  the  bimetallic  system.  They  err  in  supposing  that  we  have  reached  the 
end  of  the  evil  results  of  a  gold  standard;  we  have  not  reached  the  end.  The 
injury  is  a  continuing  one,  and  no  person  can  say  how  long  the  world  is  to 
suflfer  from  the  attempt  to  make  gold  the  only  standard  money.  The  same 
influences  which  are  now  operating  to  destroy  silver  in  the  United  States  will, 
if  successful  here,  be  turned  against  other  silver-using  countries,  and  each  new 
convert  to  the  gold  standard  will  add  to  the  general  distress.  So  long  as  the 
scramble  for  gold  continues,  prices  must  fall,  and  a  general  fall  in  prices  is  but 
another   definition   of  hard  times. 

Our  opponents,  while  claiming  entire  disinterestedness  for  themselves, 
have  appealed  to  the  selfishness  of  nearly  every  class  of  society.  Recognizing 
the  disposition  of  the  individual  voter  to  consider  the  effect  of  any  proposed 
legislation  upon  himself,  we  present  to  the  American  people  the  financial  policy 
outlined  in  the  Chicago  platform,  believing  that  it  will  result  in  the  greatest 
good  to  the  greatest  number. 

The  farmers  are  opposed  to  the  gold  standard  because  they  have  felt  its 
effects.  Since  they  sell  at  wholesale  and  buy  at  retail  they  have  lost  more  than 
they  have  gained  by  falling  prices,  and,  besides  this,  they  have  found  that  cer- 
tain fixed  charges  have  not  fallen  at  all.  Taxes  have  not  been  perceptibly 
decreased,  although  it  requires  more  of  farm  products  now  than  formerly  to 
secure  the  money  with  which  to  pay  taxes.  Debts  have  not  fallen.  The 
farmer  who  owed  $i,ooo  is  still  compelled  to  pay  $i,ooo,  although  it  may  be 
twice  as  difficult  as  formerly  to  obtain  the  dollars  with  which  to  pay  the  debt. 
Railroad  rates  have  not  been  reduced  to  keep  pace  with  falling  prices,  and  be- 
sides these  items  there  are  many  more.  The  farmer  has  thus  found  it  more 
and  more  difficult  to  live.  Has  he  not  a  just  complaint  against  the  gold 
standard? 

The  wage  earners  have  been  injured  by  a  gold  standard,  and  have  ex- 
pressed themselves  upon  the  subject  with  great  emphasis.  In  February,  1895, 
a  petition  asking  for  the  immediate  restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coin- 
age of  gold  and  silver  at  16  to  i  was  signed  by  the  representatives  of  all,  or  nearly 
all,  the  leading  labor  organizations  and  presented  to  Congress.  Wage-earners 
know  that  while  a  gold  standard  raises  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar, 
it  also  makes  it  more  difficult  to  obtain  possession  of  the  dollar;  they  know  that 
employment  is  less  permanent,  loss  of  work  more  probable,  and  re-employment 
less  certain.  A  gold  standard  encourages  the  hoarding  of  money,  because 
money  is  rising;  it  also  discourages  enterprise  and  paralyzes  industry. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  will  discourage  hoarding. 


AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  323 

because,  when  prices  are  steady  or  rising,  money  cannot  afford  to  lie  idle  in  the 
bank  vaults.  The  farmers  and  wage-earners  together  constitute  a  considerable 
majority  of  the  people  of  the  country.  Why  should  their  interests  be  ignored 
in  considering  financial  legislation?  A  monetary  system  which  is  pecuniarily 
advantageous  to  a  few  syndicates  has  far  less  to  commend  it  than  a  system 
which  would  give  hope  and  encouragement  to  those  who  create  the  nation's 
wealth. 

Our  opponents  have  made  a  special  appeal  to  those  who  hold  fire  and  life 
insurance  policies,  but  these  policy  holders  know  that,  since  the  total  premiums 
received  exceed  the  total  losses  paid,  a  rising  standard  must  be  of  more  benefit 
to  the  companies  than  to  the  policy  holders. 

Much  solicitude  has  been  expressed  by  our  opponents  for  the  depositors  in 
savings  banks.  They  constantly  parade  before  these  depositors  the  advantages 
of  a  gold  standard,  but  these  appeals  will  be  in  vain,  because  savings  bank 
depositors  know  that  under  a  gold  standard  there  is  increasing  danger  that  they 
will  lose  their  deposits  because  of  the  inability  of  the  banks  to  collect  their  assets; 
and  they  still  further  know  that,  if  the  gold  standard  is  to  continue  indefinitely, 
they  may  be  compelled  to  withdraw  their  deposits  in  order  to  pay  living 
expenses. 

It  is  only  necessary  to  note  the  increasing  number  of  failures  in  order  to 
know  that  a  gold  standard  is  ruinous  to  merchants  and  manufacturers.  These 
business  men  do  not  make  their  profits  from  the  people  from  whom  they 
borrow  money,  but  from  the  people  to  whom  they  sell  their  goods.  If  the 
people  cannot  buy,  retailers  cannot  sell,  and,  if  retailers  cannot  sell,  wholesale 
merchants  and  manufacturers  must  go  into  bankruptcy. 

Those  who  hold,  as  a  permanent  investment,  the  stock  of  railroads  and  of 
other  enterprises — I  do  not  include  those  who  speculate  in  stocks  or  use  stock 
holdings  as  a  means  of  obtaining  an  inside  advantage  in  construction  con- 
tracts— are  injured  by  a  gold  standard.  The  rising  dollar  destroys  the  earning 
power  of  these  enterprises  without  reducing  their  liabilities,  and,  as  dividends 
cannot  be  paid  until  salaries  and  fixed  charges  have  been  satisfied,  the  stock- 
holders must  bear  the  burden  of  hard  times. 

Salaries  in  business  occupations  depend  upon  business  conditions,  and  the 
gold  standard  both  lessens  the  amount  and  threatens  the  permanency  of  such 
salaries. 

Official  salaries,  except  the  salaries  of  those  who  hold  ofifice  for  life,  must, 
in  the  long  run,  be  adjusted  to  the  conditions  of  those  who  pay  the  taxes,  and  if 
the  present  financial  policy  continues  we  must  expect  the  contest  between 
the  taxpayer  and  the  taxeater  to  increase  in  bitterness. 

The  professional  classes — in  the  main — derive  their  support  from  the  pro- 
ducing classes,  and  can  only  enjoy  prosperity  when  there  is  prosperity  among 
those  who  create  wealth. 

I  have  not  attempted  to  describe  the  effect  of  the  gold  standard  upon  all 
classes — in  fact,  I  have  only  had  time  to  mention  a  few — but  each  person  will 
be  able  to  apply  the  principles  stated  to  his  own    occupation. 

It  must  also  be  remembered  that  it  is  the  desire  of  people  generally  to 
convert  their  earnings  into  real  or  personal  property.  This  being  true,  in 
considering  any  temporary  advantage  which  may  come  from  a  system  under 


324  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

which  the  dollar  rises  in  its  purchasing  power,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that 
the  dollar  cannot  buy  more  than  formerly  unless  property  sells  for  less  than 
formerly.  Hence,  it  will  be  seen  that  a  large  portion  of  those  who  may  find 
some  pecuniary  advantage  in  a  gold  standard  will  discover  that  their  losses 
exceed  their  gains. 

It  is  sometimes  asserted  by  our  opponents  that  a  bank  belongs  to  the 
debtor  class,  but  this  is  not  true  of  any  solvent  bank.  Every  statement  pub- 
lished by  a  solvent  bank  shows  that  the  assets  exceed  the  liabilities.  That  is  to 
say,  while  the  bank  owes  a  large  amount  of  money  to  its  depositors,  it  not  only 
has  enough  on  hand  in  money  and  notes  to  pay  its  depositors,  but,  in  addition 
thereto,  has  enough  to  cover  its  capital  and  surplus.  When  the  dollar  is  rising 
in  value  slowly,  a  bank  may,  by  making  short-time  loans  and  taking  good 
security,  avoid  loss;  but  when  prices  are  falling  rapidly,  the  bank  is  apt  to  lose 
more  because  of  bad  debts  than  it  can  gain  by  the  increase  in  the  purchasing 
power  of  its  capital  and  surplus. 

Some  bankers,  however,  combine  the  business  of  a  bond  broker  with  the 
ordinary  banking  business,  and  these  may  make  enough  in  the  negotiation 
of  loans  to  offset  the  losses  arising  in  legitimate  banking  business.  As  long 
as  human  nature  remains  as  it  is,  there  will  always  be  danger  that,  unless 
restrained  by  public  opinion  or  legal  enactment,  those  who  see  a  pecuniary 
profit  for  themselves  in  a  certain  condition  may  yield  to  the  temptation  to 
bring  about  that  condition.  Jefferson  has  stated  that  one  of  the  main  duties  of 
government  is  to  prevent  men  from  injuring  one  another,  and  never  was  that 
duty  more  important  than  it  is  today.  It  is  not  strange  that  those  who  have 
made  a  profit  by  furnishing  gold  to  the  Government  in  the  hour  of  its  extremity 
favor  a  financial  policy  which  will  keep  the  Government  dependent  upon  them. 
I  believe,  however,  that  I  speak  the  sentiment  of  the  vast  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  United  States  when  I  say  that  a  wise  financial  policy  administered  in 
behalf  of  all  the  people  would  make  our  Government  independent  of  any  com- 
bination of  financiers,  foreign  or  domestic. 

Let  me  say  a  word,  now,  in  regard  to  certain  persons  who  are  pecuniarily 
benefited  by  a  gold  standard,  and  who  favor  it,  not  from  a  desire  to  trespass 
upon  the  rights  of  others,  but  because  the  circumstances  which  surround  them 
blind  them  to  the  effect  of  the  gold  standard  upon  others.  I  shall  ask  you  to 
consider  the  language  of  two  gentlem.en  whose  long  public  service  and  high 
standing  in  the  party  to  which  they  belong  will  protect  them  from  adverse  criti- 
cism by  our  opponents.     In  1869  Senator  Sherman  said: 

The  contraction  of  the  currency  is  a  far  more  distressing  operation  than  Senators 
suppose.  Our  own  and  other  nations  have  gone  through  that  operation  before.  It  is 
not  possible  to  take  that  voyage  without  the  sorest  distress.  To  every  person,  except  a 
capitalist  out  of  debt,  or  a  salaried  officer,  or  annuitant,  it  Is  a  period  of  loss,  danger, 
lassitude  of  trade,  fall  of  wages,  suspension  of  enterprise,  bankruptcy  and  disaster. 
It  means  ruin  to  all  dealers  whose  debts  are  twice  their  business  capital,  though 
one-third  less  than  their  actual  property.  It  means  the  fall  of  all  agricultural  production 
without  any  great  reduction  of  taxes.  What  prudent  man  would  dare  to  build  a 
house,  a  railroad,  a  factory,  or  a  barn  with  this  certain  fact  before  him? 

As  I  have  said  before,  the  salaried  officer  referred  to  must  be  the  man 
whose  salary  is  fixed  for  life,  and  not  the  man  whose  salary  depends  upon  busi- 
ness conditions.     When  Mr.  Sherman  describes  contraction  of  the  currency  as 


AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  325 

disastrous  to  all  the  people  except  the  capitalist  out  of  debt  and  those  who 
stand  in  a  position  similar  to  his,  he  is  stating  a  truth  which  must  be  apparent 
to  every  person  who  will  give  the  matter  careful  consideration.  Mr.  Sherman 
was  at  that  time  speaking  of  the  contraction  of  the  volume  of  paper  currency, 
but  the  principle  which  he  set  forth  applies,  if  there  is  a  contraction  of  the 
volume  of  the  standard  money  of  the  world. 

Mr.  Blaine  discussed  the  same  principle  in  connection  with  the  demonetiza- 
tion of  silver.  Speaking  in  the  House  of  Representatives  on  the  7th  of  Febru- 
ary, 1878,  he  said: 

I  believe  the  struggle  now  going  on  in  this  country  and  other  countries  for  a  single 
gold  standard  would,  if  successful,  produce  widespread  disaster  in  and  throughout  the 
commercial  world.  The  destruction  of  silver  as  money,  and  the  establishing  of  gold 
as  the  sole  unit  of  value  must  have  a  ruinous  effect  on  all  forms  of  property,  ex- 
cept those  Investments  which  yield  a  fixed  return  in  money.  These  would  be  enormously 
enhanced  in  value,  and  would  gain  a  disproportionate  and  unfair  advantage  over  every 
other  species  of  property. 

Is  it  strange  that  the  "holders  of  investments  which  yield  a  fixed  return 
in  money"  can  regard  the  destruction  of  silver  with  complacency.  May  we 
not  expect  the  holders  of  other  forms  of  property  to  protest  against  giving 
to  money  a  "disproportionate  and  unfair  advantage  over  every  other  species  of 
property?"  If  the  relatively  few  whose  wealth  consists  largely  in  fixed  invest- 
ments have  a  right  to  use  the  ballot  to  enhance  the  value  of  their  investments, 
have  not  the  rest  of  the  people  the  right  to  use  the  ballot  to  protect  themselves 
from  the  disastrous  consequences  of  a  rising  standard?  The  people  who  must 
purchase  money  with  the  products  of  toil  stand  in  a  position  entirely  different 
from  the  position  of  those  who  own  money  or  receive  a  fixed  income.  The 
well-being  of  the  nation — aye,  of  civilization  itself — depends  upon  the  prosperity 
of  the  masses.  What  shall  it  profit  us  to  have  a  dollar  which  grows  more  valu- 
able every  day  if  such  a  dollar  lowers  the  standard  of  civilization  and  brings 
distress  to  the  people?  What  shall  it  profit  us  if,  in  trying  to  raise  our  credit 
by  increasing  the  purchasing  power  of  our  dollar,  we  destroy  our  ability  to 
pay  the  debts  already  contracted  by  lowering  the  purchasing  power  of  the 
products  with  which  those  debts  must  be  paid?  If  it  is  asserted,  as  it  constantly 
is  asserted,  that  the  gold  standard  will  enable  us  to  borrow  more  money  from 
abroad,  I  reply  that  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  will  restore  the  parity  be- 
tween money  and  property,  and  thus  permit  an  era  of  prosperity  which  will 
enable  the  American  people  to  become  loaners  of  money  instead  of  perpetual 
borrowers.  Even  if  we  desire  to  borrow,  how  long  can  we  continue  borrowing 
under  a  system  which,  by  lowering  the  value  of  property,  weakens  the  founda- 
tion upon  which  credit  rests? 

Even  the  >  holders  of  fixed  investments,  though  they  gain  an  advantage 
from  the  appreciation  of  the  dollar,  certainly  see  the  injustice  of  the  legislation 
which  gives  them  this  advantage  over  those  whose  incomes  depend  upon  the 
value  of  property  and  products.  If  the  holders  of  fixed  investments  will  not 
listen  to  arguments  based  upon  justice  and  equity,  I  appeal  to  them  to  consider 
the  interests  of  posterity.  We  do  not  live  for  ourselves  alone;  our  labor,  our 
self-denial,  and  our  anxious  care — all  these  are  for  those  who  are  to  come  after 
us  as  much  as  for  ourselves,  but  we  cannot  protect  our  children  beyond  the 
period  of  our  lives.    Let  those  who  are  now  reaping  advantage  from  a  vicious 


326  AT  MADISON  SQL/ARE  GARDEN. 

financial  system  remember  that  in  the  years  to  come  their  own  children  and 
their  children's  children  may,  through  the  operation  of  this  same  system,  be 
made  to  pay  tribute  to  the  descendants  of  those  who  are  wronged  today. 

As  against  the  maintenance  of  a  gold  standard,  either  permanently  or  until 
other  nations  can  be  united  for  its  overthrow,  the  Chicago  platform  presents  a 
clear  and  emphatic  demand  for  the  immediate  restoration  of  the  free  and 
unlimited  coinage  of  silver  and  gold  at  the  present  legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  with- 
out waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other  nation.  We  are  not  asking  that 
a  new  experiment  be  tried;  we  are  insisting  upon  a  return  to  a  financial  policy 
approved  by  the  experience  of  history  and  supported  by  all  the  prominent 
statesmen  of  our  nation  from  the  days  of  the  first  president  down  to  1873. 
When  we  ask  that  our  mints  be  opened  to  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  sil- 
ver into  full  legal  tender  money,  we  are  simply  asking  that  the  same  mint 
privileges  be  accorded  to  silver  that  are  now  accorded  to  gold.  When  we  ask 
that  this  coinage  be  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i,  we  simply  ask  that  our  gold  coins 
and  the  standard  silver  dollar — which,  be  it  remembered,  contains  the  same 
amount  of  pure  silver  as  the  first  silver  dollar  coined  at  our  mints — retain  their 
present  weight  and  fineness. 

The  theoretical  advantage  of  the  bimetallic  system  is  best  stated  by  a  Euro- 
pean writer  on  political  economy,  who  suggests  the  following  illustration:  A 
river  fed  from  two  sources  is  more  uniform  in  volume  than  a  river  fed  from 
one  source — the  reason  being  that  when  one  of  the  feeders  is  swollen  the  other 
may  be  low;  whereas,  a  river  which  has  but  one  feeder  must  rise  or  fall  with 
that  feeder.  So  in  the  case  of  bimetallism;  the  volume  of  metallic  money  re- 
ceives contributions  from  both  the  gold  mines  and  the  silver  mines,  and  there- 
fore varies  less,  and  the  dollar  resting  upon  two  metals  is  less  changeable  in  its 
purchasing  power  than  the  dollar  which  rests  upon  one  metal  only. 

If  there  are  two  kinds  of  money,  the  option  must  rest  either  with  the 
debtor  or  with  the  creditor.  Assuming  that  their  rights  are  equal,  we  must 
look  at  the  interest  of  society  in  general  in  order  to  determine  to  which  side 
the  option  should  be  given.  Under  the  bimetallic  system  gold  and  silver  are 
linked  together  by  law  at  a  fixed  ratio,  and  any  person  or  persons  owning  any 
quantity  of  either  metal  can  have  the  same  converted  into  full  legal-tender 
money.  If  the  creditor  has  the  right  to  choose  the  metal  in  which  payment 
shall  be  made,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  he  will  require  the  debtor  to  pay 
in  the  dearer  metal  if  there  is  any  perceptible  diflference  between  the  bullion 
values  of  the  metals.  This  new  demand  created  for  the  dearer  metal  will  make 
that  metal  dearer  still,  while  the  decreased  demand  for  the  cheaper  metal  will 
make  that  metal  cheaper  still.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  debtor  exercises  the 
option,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  he  will  pay  in  the  cheaper  metal  if  one 
metal  is  perceptibly  cheaper  than  the  other;  but  the  demand  thus  created  for  the 
cheaper  metal  will  raise  its  price,  while  the  lessened  demand  for  the  dearer  metal 
will  lower  its  price.  In  other  words,  when  the  creditor  has  the  option,  the 
metals  are  drawn  apart;  whereas,  when  the  debtor  has  the  option,  the  metals 
are  held  together  approximately  at  the  ratio  fixed  by  law,  provided  the  demand 
created  is  sufficient  to  absorb  all  of  both  metals  presented  at  the  mint.  Society 
is,  therefore,  interested  in  having  the  option  exercised  by  the  debtor.  Indeed, 
there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  real  bimetallism  unless  the  option  is  exercised  by 


/■#  C/.  ' 


^^^ 


AT  MAD/SON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  329 

the  debtor.  The  exercise  of  the  option  by  the  debtor  compels  the  creditor 
classes,  whether  domestic  or  foreign,  to  exert  themselves  to  maintain  the  parity 
between  gold  and  silver  at  the  legal  ratio,  whereas  they  might  find  a  profit  in 
driving  one  of  the  metals  to  a  premium  if  they  could  then  demand  the  dearer 
metal.  The  right  of  the  debtor  to  choose  the  coin  in  which  payment  shall  be 
made  extends  to  obligations  due  from  the  government  as  well  as  to  contracts 
between  individuals.  A  government  obligation  is  simply  a  debt  due  from  all 
the  people  to  one  of  the  people,  and  it  is  impossible  to  justify  a  policy  which 
makes  the  interests  of  the  one  person  who  holds  the  obligation  superior  to  the 
rights  of  the  many  who  must  be  taxed  to  pay  it.  When,  prior  to  1873,  silver 
was  at  a  premium,  it  was  never  contended  that  national  honor  required  the 
payment  of  government  obligations  in  silver,  and  the  Matthews  resolution, 
adopted  by  Congress  in  1878,  expressly  asserted  the  right  of  the  United  States 
to  redeem  coin  obligations  in  standard  silver  dollars  as  well  as  in  gold  coin. 

Upon  this  subject  the  Chicago  platform  reads: 

We  are  opposed  to  the  policy  and  practice  of  surrendering  to  the  holders  of  the 
obligations  of  the  United  States  the  option  reserved  by  law  to  the  Government  of 
redeeming  such  obligations  in  either  silver  coin  or  gold  coin. 

It  is  constantly  assumed  by  some  that  the  United  States  notes,  commonly 
called  greenbacks,  and  the  treasury  notes  issued  under  the  act  of  1890,  arc 
responsible  for  the  recent  drain  upon  the  gold  reserve,  but  this  assumption  is 
entirely  without  foundation.  Secretary  Carlisle  appeared  before  the  House 
Committee  on  Appropriations  on  January  21,  1895,  and  I  quote  from  the 
printed  report  of  his  testimony  before  the  committee: 

Mr.  Sibley:  I  wonld  like  to  ask  you  (perhaps  not  entirely  connected  with  the 
matter  under  discussion)  what  objection  there  could  be  to  having  the  option  of  re- 
deeming either  in  silver  or  gold  lie  with  the  Treasury  instead  of  the  note  holder? 

Secretary  Carlisle:  If  that  policy  had  been  adopted  at  the  beginning  of  resump- 
tion— and  I  am  not  saying  this  for  the  purpose  of  criticising  the  action  of  any  of  my  pre- 
decessors, or  anybody  else — but  if  the  policy  of  reserving  to  the  Government,  at  the 
beginning  of  resumption,  the  option  of  redeeming  in  gold  or  silver  all  Its  paper  pre- 
sented, I  believe  it  would  have  worked  beneficially,  and  there  would  have  been  no 
trouble  growing  out  of  it,  but  the  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury  from  the  beginning  of 
resumption  have  pursued  a  policy  of  redeeming  in  gold  or  silver,  at  the  option  of 
the  holder  of  the  paper,  and  if  any  Secretary  had  afterward  attempted  to  change  that 
policy  and  force  silver  upon  a  man  who  wanted  gold,  or  gold  upon  a  man  who  wanted 
silver,  and  especially  if  he  had  made  that  attempt  at  such  a  critical  period  as  we 
have  had  in  the  last  two  years,  my  judgment  is  it  would  have  been  very  disastrous. 

I  do  not  agree  with  the  Secretary  that  it  was  wise  to  follow  a  bad  prece- 
dent, but  from  his  answer  it  will  be  seen  that  the  fault  does  not  lie  with  the 
greenbacks  and  treasury  notes,  but  rather  with  the  executive  officers  who  have 
seen  fit  to  surrender  a  right  which  should  have  been  exercised  for  the  protec- 
tion of  the  interests  of  the  people.  This  executive  action  has  already  been 
made  the  excuse  for  the  issue  of  more  than  $250,000,000  in  bonds,  and  it  is  im- 
possible to  estimate  the  amount  of  bonds  which  may  hereafter  be  issued  if  this 
policy  is  continued.  We  are  told  that  any  attempt  upon  the  part  of  the  Gov- 
ernment at  this  time  to  redeem  its  obligations  in  silver  would  put  a  premium 
upon  gold,  but  why  should  it?  The  Bank  of  France  exercises  the  right  to  re- 
deem all  bank  paper  in  either  gold  or  silver,  and  yet  France  maintains  the 
parity  between  gold  and  silver  at  the  ratio  of  ISJ^  to  i,  and  retains  in  circula- 
tion more  silver  per  capita  than  we  do  in  the  United  States. 

19 


330  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

It  may  be  further  answered  that  our  opponents  have  suggested  no  feasible 
plan  for  avoiding  the  dangers  which  they  fear.  The  retirement  of  the  green- 
backs and  treasury  notes  would  not  protect  the  Treasury,  because  the  same 
policy  which  now  leads  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  redeem  all  government 
paper  in  gold,  when  gold  is  demanded,  will  require  the  redemption  of  all  silver 
dollars  and  silver  certificates  in  gold,  if  the  greenbacks  and  treasury  notes  are 
withdrawn  from  circulation.  More  than  this,  if  the  Government  should  retire 
its  paper  and  throw  upon  the  banks  the  necessity  of  furnishing  coin  redemption, 
the  banks  would  exercise  the  right  to  furnish  either  gold  or  silver.  In  other 
words,  they  would  exercise  the  option,  just  as  the  Government  ought  to  exer- 
cise it  now.  The  Government  must  either  exercise  the  right  to  redeem  its 
obligations  in  silver  when  silver  is  more  convenient,  or  it  must  retire  all  the 
silver  and  silver  certificates  from  circulation  and  leave  nothing  but  gold  as 
legal  tender  money.  Are  our  opponents  willing  to  outline  a  financial  system 
which  will  carry  out  their  policy  to  its  legitimate  conclusion,  or  will  they  con- 
tinue to  cloak  their  designs  in  ambiguous  phrases? 

There  is  an  actual  necessity  for  bimetallism  as  well  as  a  theoretical  defense 
of  it.  During  the  last  twenty-three  years  legislation  has  been  creating  an  addi- 
tional demand  for  gold,  and  this  law-created  demand  has  resulted  in  increasing 
the  purchasing  power  of  each  ounce  of  gold.  The  restoration  of  bimetallism  in 
the  United  States  will  take  away  from  gold  just  so  much  of  its  purchasing 
power  as  was  added  to  it  by  the  demonetization  of  silver  by  the  United  States. 
The  silver  dollar  is  now  held  up  to  the  gold  dollar  by  legal-tender  laws  and  not 
by  redemption  in  gold,  because  the  standard  silver  dollars  are  not  now  redeem- 
able in  gold  either  in  law  or  by  administrative  policy. 

We  contend  that  free  and  unlimited  coinage  by  the  United  States  alone 
will  raise  the  bullion  value  of  silver  to  its  coinage  value,  and  thus  make  silver 
bullion  worth  $1.29  per  ounce  in  gold  throughout  the  world.  This  proposition 
is  in  keeping  with  natural  laws,  not  in  defiance  of  them.  The  best-known  law 
of  commerce  as  the  law  of  supply  and  demand.  We  recognize  this  law  and 
build  our  argument  upon  it.  We  apply  this  law  to  money  when  we  say  that  a 
reduction  in  the  volume  of  money  will  raise  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar; 
we  also  apply  the  law  of  supply  and  demand  to  silver  when  we  say  that  a  new 
demand  for  silver  created  by  law  will  raise  the  price  of  silver  bullion.  Gold 
and  silver  are  different  from  other  commodities,  in  that  they  are  limited  in 
quantity.  Corn,  wheat,  manufactured  products,  etc.,  can  be  produced  almost 
without  limit,  provided  they  can  be  sold  at  a  price  sufficient  to  stimulate  produc- 
tion, but  gold  and  silver  are  called  precious  metals  because  they  are  found,  not 
produced.  These  metals  have  been  the  objects  of  anxious  search  as  far  back  as 
history  runs,  yet,  according  to  Mr.  Harvey's  calculation,  all  the  gold  coin  of 
the  world  can  be  melted  into  a  22-foot  cube  and  all  the  silver  coin  in  the  world 
into  a  66-foot  cube.  Because  gold  and  silver  are  limited,  both  in  the  quantity 
now  in  hand  and  in  annual  production,  it  follows  that  legislation  can  fix  the 
ratio  between  them.  Any  purchaser  who  stands  ready  to  take  the  entire  supply 
of  any  given  article  at  a  certain  price  can  prevent  that  article  from  falling  below 
that  price.  So  the  Government  can  fix  a  price  for  gold  and  silver  by  creating 
a  demand  greater  than  the  supply.  International  bimetallists  believe  that  sev- 
eral nations,  by  entering  into  an  agreement  to  coin  at  a  fixed  ratio  all  the  gold 


AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  331 

and  silver  presented,  can  maintain  the  bullion  value  of  the  metals  at  the  mint 
ratio.  When  a  mint  price  is  thus  established,  it  regulates  the  bullion  price, 
because  any  person  desiring  coin  may  have  the  bullion  converted  into  coin  at 
that  price,  and  any  person  desiring  bullion  can  secure  it  by  melting  the  coin. 
The  only  question  upon  which  international  bimetallists  and  independent  bimet- 
allists  differ  is:  Can  the  United  States,  by  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of 
silver  at  the  present  legal  ratio,  create  a  demand  for  silver  which,  taken  in 
connection  with  the  demand  already  in  existence,  will  be  sufficient  to  utilize  all 
the  silver  that  will  be  presented  at  the  mints?  They  agree  in  their  defense  of 
the  bimetallic  principle,  and  they  agree  in  unalterable  opposition  to  the  gold 
standard.  International  bimetallists  cannot  complain  that  free  coinage  gives 
a  benefit  to  the  mine  owner,  because  international  bimetallism  gives  to  the 
owner  of  silver  all  the  advantages  offered  by  independent  bimetallism  at  the 
same  ratio.  International  bimetallists  cannot  accuse  the  advocates  of  free  sil- 
ver of  being  "bullion  owners  who  desire  to  raise  the  value  of  their  bullion;" 
or  "debtors  who  desire  to  pay  their  debts  in  cheap  dollars;"  or  "demagogues 
who  desire  to  curry  favor  with  the  people."  They  must  rest  their  opposition 
upon  one  ground  only,  namely:  that  the  supply  of  silver  available  for  coinage 
is  too  large  to  be  utilized  by  the  United  States. 

In  discussing  this  question  we  must  consider  the  capacity  of  our  people 
to  use  silver,  and  the  quantity  of  silver  which  can  come  to  our  mints.  It  must 
be  remembered  that  we  live  in  a  country  only  partially  developed,  and  that  our 
people  far  surpass  any  equal  number  of  people  in  the  world  in  their  power  to 
consume  and  produce.  Our  extensive  railroad  development  and  enormous  in- 
ternal commerce  must  also  be  taken  into  consideration.  Now,  how  much  silver 
can  come  here?  Not  the  coined  silver  of  the  world,  because  almost  all  of  it  is 
more  valuable  at  this  time  in  other  lands  than  it  will  be  at  our  mints  under  free 
coinage.  If  our  mints  are  opened  to  free  and  unlimited  coinage  at  the  present 
ratio,  merchandise  silver  cannot  come  here,  because  the  labor  applied  to  it  has 
made  it  worth  more  in  the  form  of  merchandise  than  it  will  be  worth  at  our 
mints.  We  cannot  even  expect  all  of  the  annual  product  of  silver,  because 
India,  China,  Japan,  Mexico,  and  all  the  other  silver-using  countries  must 
satisfy  their  annual  needs  from  the  annual  product;  the  arts  will  require  a  large 
amount,  and  the  gold  standard  countries  will  need  a  considerable  quantity  for 
subsidiary  coinage.  We  will  be  required  to  coin  only  that  which  is  not  needed 
elsewhere;  but,  if  we  stand  ready  to  take  and  utilize  all  of  it,  other  nations  will 
be  compelled  to  buy  at  the  price  which  we  fix.  Many  fear  that  the  opening 
of  our  mints  will  be  followed  by  an  enormous  increase  in  the  annual  production 
of  silver.  This  is  conjecture.  Silver  has  been  used  as  money  for  thousands 
of  years,  and  during  all  of  that  time  the  world  has  never  suffered  from  an  over- 
production. If,  for  any  reason,  the  supply  of  gold  or  silver  in  the  future  ever 
exceeds  the  requirements  of  the  arts  and  the  needs  of  commerce,  we  confi- 
dently hope  that  the  intelligence  of  the  people  will  be  sufficient  to  devise  and 
enact  any  legislation  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  public.  It  is  folly  to 
refuse  to  the  people  the  money  which  they  now  need  for  fear  they  may  here- 
after have  more  than  they  need.  I  am  firmly  convinced  that  by  opening  our 
mints  to  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  at  the  present  ratio  we  can  create  a 


332  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

demand  for  silver  which  will  keep  the  price  of  silver  bullion  at  $1.29  per  ounce, 
measured  by  gold. 

Some  of  our  opponents  attribute  the  fall  in  the  value  of  silver,  when  meas- 
ured by  gold,  to  the  fact  that  during  the  last  quarter  of  a  century  the  world's 
supply  of  silver  has  increased  more  rapidly  than  the  world's  supply  of  gold. 
This  argument  is  entirely  answered  by  the  fact  that,  during  the  last  five  years, 
the  annual  production  of  gold  has  increased  more  rapidly  than  the  annual  pro- 
duction of  silver.  Since  the  gold  price  of  silver  has  fallen  more  during  these 
five  years  than  it  ever  fell  in  any  previous  five  years  in  the  history  of  the  world, 
it  is  evident  that  the  fall  is  not  due  to  increased  production.  Prices  can  be 
lowered  as  eflfectually  by  decreasing  the  demand  for  an  article  as  by  increasing 
the  supply  of  it,  and  it  seems  certain  that  the  fall  in  the  gold  price  of  silver 
is  due  to  hostile  legislation  and  not  to  natural  laws. 

In  answer  to  the  charge  that  gold  will  go  abroad  under  free  coinage,  it 
must  be  remembered  that  no  gold  can  leave  this  country  until  the  owner  of  the 
gold  receives  something  in  return  for  it  which  he  would  rather  have.  In  other 
words,  when  gold  leaves  the  country  those  who  formerly  owned  it  will  be  bene- 
fited. There  is  no  process  by  which  we  can  be  compelled  to  part  with  our  gold 
against  our  will,  nor  is  there  any  process  by  which  silver  can  be  forced  upon  us 
without  our  consent.  Exchanges  are  matters  of  agreement,  and  if  silver  comes 
to  this  country  under  free  coinage  it  will  be  at  the  invitation  of  some  one  in  this 
country  who  will  give  something  in  exchange  for  it. 

Our  opponents  cannot  ignore  the  fact  that  gold  is  now  going  abroad  in 
spite  of  all  legislation  intended  to  prevent  it,  and  no  silver  is  being  coined 
to  take  its  place.  Not  only  is  gold  going  abroad  now,  but  it  must  continue 
to  go  abroad  as  long  as  the  present  financial  policy  is  adhered  to,  unless  we 
continue  to  borrow  from  across  the  ocean,  and  even  then  we  simply  postpone 
the  evil,  because  the  amount  borrowed,  together  with  interest  upon  it,  must 
be  repaid  in  appreciating  dollars.  The  American  people  now  owe  a  large  sum 
to  European  creditors,  and  falling  prices  have  left  a  larger  and  larger  margin 
between  our  net  national  income  and  our  annual  interest  charge.  There  is  only 
one  way  to  stop  the  increasing  flow  of  gold  from  our  shores,  and  that  is  to 
stop  falling  prices.  The  restoration  of  bimetallism  will  not  only  stop  falling 
prices,  but  will — to  some  extent — restore  prices  by  reducing  the  world's  demand 
for  gold.  If  it  is  argued  that  a  rise  in  prices  lessens  the  value  of  the  dollars 
which  we  pay  to  our  creditors,  I  reply  that,  in  the  balancing  of  equities,  the 
American  people  have  as  much  right  to  favor  a  financial  system  which  will 
maintain  or  restore  prices  as  foreign  creditors  have  to  insist  upon  a  financial 
system  that  will  reduce  prices.  But  the  interests  of  society  are  far  superior  to 
the  interests  of  either  debtors  or  creditors,  and  the  interests  of  society  demand 
a  financial  system  which  will  add  to  the  volume  of  the  standard  money  of  the 
world,  and  thus  restore  stability  to  prices. 

Perhaps  the  most  persistent  misrepresentation  that  we  have  to  meet  is  the 
charge  that  we  are  advocating  the  payment  of  debts  in  fifty-cent  dollars.  At 
the  present  time  and  under  present  laws  a  silver  dollar,  when  melted,  loses 
nearly  half  its  value,  but  that  will  not  be  true  when  we  again  establish  a  mint 
price  for  silver  and  leave  no  surplus  silver  upon  the  market  to  drag  down  the 
price  of  bullion.     Under  bimetallism  silver  bullion  will  be  worth  as  much  as 


A  T  MAD/SON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  333 

silver  coin,  just  as  gold  bullion  is  now  worth  as  much  as  gold  coin,  and  we 
believe  that  a  silver  dollar  will  be  worth  as  much  as  a  gold  dollar. 

The  charge  of  repudiation  comes  with  poor  grace  from  those  who  are 
seeking  to  add  to  the  weight  of  existing  debts  by  legislation  which  makes 
money  dearer,  and  who  conceal  their  designs  against  the  general  welfare 
under  the  euphonious  pretense  that  they  are  upholding  public  credit  and 
national  honor. 

Those  who  deny  the  ability  of  the  United  States  to  maintain  the  parity 
between  gold  and  silver  at  the  present  legal  ratio  without  foreign  aid 
point  to  Mexico  and  assert  that  the  opening  of  our  mints  will  reduce  us 
to  a  silver  basis  and  raise  gold  to  a  premium.  It  is  no  reflection  upon  our , 
sister  republic  to  remind  our  people  that  the  United  States  is  much  greater 
than  Mexico  in  area,  in  population,  and  in  commercial  strength.  It  is  absurd 
to  assert  that  the  United  States  is  not  able  to  do  anything  which  Mexico 
has  failed  to  accomplish.  The  one  thing  necessary  in  order  to  maintain  the 
parity  is  to  furnish  a  demand  great  enough  to  utilize  all  the  silver  which  will 
come  to  the  mints.  That  Mexico  has  failed  to  do  this  is  not  proof  that  the 
United  States  would  also  fail. 

It  is  also  argued  that,  since  a  number  of  the  nations  have  demonetized 
silver,  nothing  can  be  done  until  all  of  those  nations  restore  bimetallism. 
This  is  also  illogical.  It  is  immaterial  how  many  or  how  few  nations 
have  opened  mints,  provided  there  are  sufficient  open  mints  to  furnish  a 
monetary  demand  for  all  the  gold  and  silver  available  for  coinage. 

In  reply  to  the  argument  that  improved  machinery  has  lessened  the  cost 
of  producing  silver,  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the  same  is  true  of  the 
production  of  gold,  and  yet,  notwithstanding  that,  gold  has  risen  in  value. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  cost  of  production  does  not  determine  the  value 
of  the  precious  metals,  except  as  it  may  aflFect  the  supply.  If,  for  instance, 
the  cost  of  producing  gold  should  be  reduced  ninety  per  cent  without  any 
increase  in  the  output,  the  purchasing  power  of  an  ounce  of  gold  would 
not  fall.  So  long  as  there  is  a  monetary  demand  sufficient  to  take  at  a 
fixed  mint  price  all  the  gold  and  silver  produced,  the  cost  of  production 
need  not  be  considered. 

It  is  often  objected  that  the  prices  of  gold  and  silver  cannot  be  fixed  in 
relation  to  each  other,  because  of  the  variation  in  the  relative  production  of 
the  metals.  This  argument  also  overlooks  the  fact  that,  if  the  demand  for  both 
metals  at  a  fixed  price  is  greater  than  the  supply  of  both,  relative  production 
becomes  immaterial.  In  the  early  part  of  the  present  century  the  annual 
production  of  silver  was  worth,  at  the  coinage  ratio,  about  three  times  as 
much  as  the  annual  production  of  gold;  whereas,  soon  after  1849,  the  annual 
production  of  gold  became  worth  about  three  times  as  much,  at  the  coinage 
ratio,  as  the  annual  production  of  silver;  and  yet,  owing  to  the  maintenance 
of  the  bimetallic  standard,  these  enormous  changes  in  relative  production  had 
but  a  slight  effect  upon  the  relative  values  of  the  metals. 

If  it  is  asserted  by  our  opponents  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  is  in- 
tended only  for  the  benefit  of  the  mine  owners,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
free  coinage  cannot  restore  to  the  mine  owners  any  more  than  demonetization 
took  away;  and  it  must  also  be  remembered  that  the  loss  which  the  demonetiza- 


334  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

tion  of  silver  has  brought  to  the  mine  owners  is  insignificant  compared  to 
the  loss  which  this  policy  has  brought  to  the  rest  of  the  people.  The  restoration 
of  silver  will  bring  to  the  people  generally  many  times  as  much  advantage  as  the 
mine  owners  can  obtain  from  it.  While  it  is  not  the  purpose  of  free  coinage 
to  specially  aid  any  particular  class,  yet  those  who  believe  that  the  restoration 
of  silver  is  needed  by  the  whole  people  should  not  be  deterred  because  an 
incidental  benefit  will  come  to  the  mine  owner.  The  erection  of  forts,  the  deep- 
ening of  harbors,  the  improvement  of  rivers,  the  erection  of  public  buildings — 
all  these  confer  incidental  benefits  upon  individuals  and  communities,  and  yet 
these  incidental  benefits  do  not  deter  us  from  making  appropriations  for  these 
purposes  whenever  such  appropriations  are  necessary  for  the  public  good. 

The  argument  that  a  silver  dollar  is  heavier  than  a  gold  dollar,  and  that, 
therefore,  silver  is  less  convenient  to  carry  in  large  quantities,  is  completely 
answered  by  the  silver  certificate,  which  is  as  easily  carried  as  the  gold  cer- 
tificate or  any  other  kind  of  paper  money. 

There  are  some  who,  while  admitting  the  benefits  of  bimetallism,  object 
to  coinage  at  the  present  ratio.  If  any  are  deceived  by  this  objection  they  ought 
to  remember  that  there  are  no  bimetallists  who  are  earnestly  endeavoring  to 
secure  it  at  any  other  ratio  than  i6  to  i.  We  are  opposed  to  any  change  in 
the  ratio  for  two  reasons:  first,  because  a  change  would  produce  great  in- 
justice; and,  second,  because  a  change  in  the  ratio  is  not  necessary.  A  change 
would  produce  injustice  because,  if  eflfected  in  the  manner  usually  suggested,  it 
would  result  in  an  enormous  contraction  in  the  volume  of  standard  money. 

If,  for  instance,  it  was  decided  by  international  agreement  to  raise  the 
ratios  throughout  the  world  to  32  to  i,  the  change  might  be  effected  in  any 
one  of  three  ways:  the  silver  dollar  could  be  double  in  size,  so  that  the  new 
silver  dollar  would  weigh  thirty-two  times  as  much  as  the  present  gold  dollar; 
or  the  present  gold  dollar  could  be  reduced  one-half  in  weight,  so  that  the 
present  silver  dollar  would  weigh  thirty-two  times  as  much  as  the  new  gold 
dollar;  or  the  change  could  be  made  by  increasing  the  size  of  the  silver  dollar 
and  decreasing  the  size  of  the  gold  dollar  until  the  new  silver  dollar  would 
weigh  thirty-iwo  times  as  much  as  the  new  gold  dollar.  Those  who  have 
advised  a  change  in  the  ratio  have  usually  suggested  that  the  silver  dollar  be 
doubled.  If  this  change  were  made  it  would  necessitate  the  recoinage  of 
four  billions  of  silver  into  two  billions  of  dollars.  There  would  be 
an  immediate  loss  of  two  billions  of  dollars  either  to  individuals  or  to 
the  Government,  but  this  would  be  the  least  of  the  injury.  A  shrinkage 
of  one-half  in  the  silver  money  of  the  world  would  mean  a  shrinkage  of  one- 
fourth  in  the  total  volume  of  metallic  money.  This  contraction,  by  increasing 
the  value  of  the  dollar,  would  virtually  increase  the  debts  of  the  world  billions 
of  dollars,  and  decrease  still  more  the  value  of  the  property  of  the  world  as 
measured  by  dollars.  Besides  this  immediate  result,  such  a  change  in  the 
ratio  would  permanently  decrease  the  annual  addition  to  the  world's  supply 
of  money,  because  the  annual  silver  product,  when  coined  into  dollars  twice  as 
large,  would  make  only  half  as  many  dollars. 

The  people  of  the  United  States  would  be  injured  by  a  change  in  the 
ratio,  not  because  they  produce  silver,  but  because  they  own  property  and 
owe  debts,  and  they  cannot  aflford  to  thus  decrease  the  value  of  their  property 
or  increase  the  burden  of  their  debts. 


AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  335 

In   1878   Mr.    Carlisle  said: 

Mankind  will  be  fortunate  indeed  if  the  annual  production  of  gold  and  Bilrer 
coin  shall  keep  pace  with  the  annual  increase  of  population  and  industry. 

I  repeat  this  assertion.  All  of  the  gold  and  silver  annually  available 
for  coinage,  when  converted  into  coin  at  the  present  ratio,  will  not,  in  my 
judgment,  more  than  supply  our  monetary  needs. 

In  supporting  the  act  of  1890,  known  as  the  Sherman  act.  Senator  Sher- 
man, on  June  5  of  that  year,  said: 

Under  the  law  of  February,  1878,  the  purchase  of  12,000,000  worth  of  silver  bullion 
a  month  has  by  coinage  produced  annually  an  average  of  nearly  $3,000,000  per  month 
for  a  period  of  twelve  years,  but  this  amount,  in  view  of  the  retirement  of  the  bank 
notes,  will  not  increase  our  currency  in  proportion  to  our  increasing  population.  If 
our  present  currency  is  estimated  at  $1,400,000,000,  and  our  population  is  increasing 
at  the  ratio  of  3  per  cent,  per  annum,  it  would  require  $42,000,000  Increased  circulation 
each  year  to  keep  pace  with  the  increase  of  population;  but,  as  the  increase  of  pop- 
ulation is  accompanied  by  a  still  greater  ratio  of  increase  of  wealth  and  business. 
it  was  thought  that  an  immediate  increase  of  circulation  might  be  obtained  by  larger 
purchases  of  silver  bullion  to  an  amount  sufficient  to  make  good  the  retirement  of 
bank  notes  and  keep  pace  with  the  growth  of  population.  Assuming  that  $54,000,000 
a  year  of  additional  currency  is  needed  upon  this  basis,  that  amount  is  provided 
for  In  this  bill  by  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  In  exchange  for  bullion  at  the  market  price. 

If  the  United  States  then  needed  more  than  forty-two  millions  annually 
to  keep  pace  with  population  and  business,  it  now,  with  a  larger  population, 
needs  a  still  greater  annual  addition;  and  the  United  States  is  only  one  nation 
among  many.  Our  opponents  make  no  adequate  provision  for  the  increasing 
monetary  needs  of  the  world. 

In  the  second  place,  a  change  in  the  ratio  is  not  necessary.  Hostile 
legislation  has  decreased  the  demand  for  silver  and  lowered  its  price  when 
measured  by  gold,  while  this  same  hostile  legislation,  by  increasing  the  de- 
mand for  gold,  has  raised  the  value  of  gold  when  measured  by  other  forms 
of  property. 

We  are  told  that  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  would  be  a  hardship 
upon  those  who  have  entered  into  contracts  payable  in  gold  coin,  but  this 
is  a  mistake.  It  will  be  easier  to  obtain  the  gold  with  which  to  meet  a  gold 
contract,  when  most  of  the  people  can  use  silver,  than  it  is  now  when  everyone 
is  trying  to  secure  gold. 

The  Chicago  platform  expressly  declares  in  favor  of  such  legislation  as 
may  be  necessary  to  prevent,  for  the  future,  the  demonetization  of  any  kind 
of  legal-tender  money  by  private  contract.  Such  contracts  are  objected  to 
on  the  ground  that  they  are  against  public  policy.  No  one  questions  the  right 
of  legislatures  to  fix  the  rate  of  interest  which  can  be  collected  by  law;  there 
is  far  more  reason  for  preventing  private  individuals  from  setting  aside  legal- 
tender  law.  The  money  which  is  by  law  made  a  legal  tender,  must,  in  the 
course  of  ordinary  business,  be  accepted  by  ninety-nine  out  of  every  hundred 
persons.  Why  should  the  one-hundredth  man  be  permitted  to  exempt 
himself  from  the  general  rule?  Special  contracts  have  a  tendency  to  increase 
the  demand  for  a  particular  kind  of  money,  and  thus  force  it  to  a  premium. 
Have  not  the  people  a  right  to  say  that  a  comparatively  few  individuals  shall 
not  be  permitted  to  derange  the  financial  system  of  the  nation  in  order  to 
collect  a  premium  in  case  they  succeed  in  forcing  one  kind  of  money  to  a 
premium? 


336  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

There  is  another  argument  to  which  I  ask  your  attention.  Some  of  the 
more  zealous  opponents  of  free  coinage  point  to  the  fact  that  thirteen  months 
must  elapse  between  the  election  and  the  first  regular  session  of  the  next 
Congress,  and  assert  that  during  that  time,  in  case  people  declare  themselves 
in  favor  of  free  coinage,  all  loans  will  be  withdrawn  and  all  mortgages  fore- 
closed. If  these  are  merely  prophecies  indulged  in  by  those  who  have  for- 
gotten the  provision  of  the  Constitution,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  remind  them 
that  the  President  is  empowered  to  convene  Congress  in  extraordinary  session 
whenever  the  public  good  requires  such  action.  If,  in  November,  the  people 
by  their  ballots  declare  themselves  in  favor  of  the  immediate  restoration  of 
bimetallism,  the  system  can  be  inaugurated  within  a  few  months. 

If,  however,  the  assertion  that  loans  will  be  withdrawn  and  mortgages  fore- 
closed is  made  to  prevent  such  political  action  as  the  people  may  believe  to 
be  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  their  rights,  then  a  new  and  vital  issue  is 
raised.  Whenever  it  is  necessary  for  the  people  as  a  whole  to  obtain  consent 
from  the  owners  of  money  and  the  changers  of  money  before  they  can  legislate 
upon  financial  questions,  we  shall  have  passed  from  a  democracy  to  a  plutocracy. 
But  that  time  has  not  yet  arrived.  Threats  and  intimidation  will  be  of  no  avail. 
The  people  who,  in  1776,  rejected  the  doctrine  that  kings  rule  by  right  divine, 
will  not,  in  this  generation,  subscribe  to  the  doctrine  that  money  is  omnipo- 
tent. 

In  conclusion,  permit  me  to  say  a  word  in  regard  to  international  bimetal- 
lism. We  are  not  opposed  to  an  international  agreement  looking  to  the  restora- 
tion of  bimetallism  throughout  the  world.  The  advocates  of  free  coinage 
have  on  all  occasions  shown  their  willingness  to  co-operate  with  other  nations 
in  the  reinstatement  of  silver,  but  they  are  not  willing  to  await  the  pleasure 
of  other  governments  when  immediate  relief  is  needed  by  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  and  they  further  believe  that  independent  action  offers  better 
assurance  of  intet:national  bimetallism  than  servile  dependence  upon  foreign  aid. 
For  more  than  twenty  years  we  have  invited  the  assistance  of  European  nations, 
but  all  progress  in  the  direction  of  international  bimetallism  has  been  blocked 
by  the  opposition  of  those  who  derive  a  pecuniary  benefit  from  the  appreciation 
of  gold.  How  long  must  we  wait  for  bimetallism  to  be  brought  to  us  by  those 
who  profit  by  monometallism?  If  the  double  standard  will  bring  benefits  to 
our  people,  who  will  deny  them  the  right  to  enjoy  those  benefits?  If  our 
opponents  would  admit  the  right,  the  ability  and  the  duty  of  our  people 
to  act  for  themselves  on  all  public  questions  without  the  assistance  and 
regardless  of  the  wishes  of  other  nations,  and  then  propose  the  remedial 
legislation  which  they  consider  sufficient,  we  could  meet  them  in  the  field 
of  honorable  debate;  but,  when  they  assert  that  this  nation  is  helpless  to 
protect  the  rights  of  its  own  citizens,  we  challenge  them  to  submit  the  issue 
to  a  people  whose  patriotism  has  never  been  appealed  to  in  vain. 

We  shall  not  offend  other  nations  when  we  declare  the  right  of  the  Amer- 
ican people  to  govern  themselves,  and,  without  let  or  hindrance  from  without, 
decide  upon  every  question  presented  for  their  consideration.  In  taking  this 
position,  we  simply  maintain  the  dignity  of  seventy  million  citizens  who  are 
second  to  none  in  their  capacity  for  self-government. 

The  gold  standard  has  compelled  the  American  people  to  pay  an  ever- 


AT  MAD/SON  SQUARE  GARDEN.  337 

increasing  tribute  to  the  creditor  nations  of  the  world — a  tribute  which  no  one 
dares  to  defend.  I  assert  that  national  honor  requires  the  United  States  to 
secure  justice  for  all  its  citizens  as  well  as  do  justice  to  all  its  creditors.  For  a 
people  like  ours,  blest  with  natural  resources  of  surpassing  richness,  to  proclaim 
themselves  impotent  to  frame  a  financial  system  suited  to  their  own  needs  is 
humiliating  beyond  the  power  of  language  to  describe.  We  cannot  enforce 
respect  for  our  foreign  policy  so  long  as  we  confess  ourselves  unable  to  frame 
our  own  financial  policy. 

Honest  differences  of  opinion  have  always  existed,  and  ever  will  exist, 
as  to  the  legislation  best  calculated  to  promote  the  public  weal;  but  when  it  is 
seriously  asserted  that  this  nation  must  bow  to  the  dictation  of  other  nations 
and  accept  the  policies  which  they  insist  upon,  the  right  of  self-government  is 
assailed,  and  until  that  question  is  settled  all  other  questions  are  insignificant. 

Citizens  of  New  York,  I  have  traveled  from  the  center  of  the  continent 
to  the  seaboard  that  I  might,  in  the  very  beginning  of  the  campaign,  bring 
you  greeting  from  the  people  of  the  West  and  South  and  assure  you  that  their 
desire  is  not  to  destroy  but  to  build  up.  They  invite  you  to  accept  the  princi- 
ples of  a  living  faith  rather  than  listen  to  those  who  preach  the  gospel  of  de- 
spair and  advise  endurance  of  the  ills  you  have.  The  advocates  of  free  coinage 
believe  that,  in  striving  to  secure  the  immediate  restoration  of  bimetallism,  they 
are  laboring  in  your  behalf  as  well  as  in  their  own  behalf.  A  few  of  your  people 
may  prosper  under  present  conditions,  but  the  permanent  welfare  of  New  York 
rests  upon  the  producers  of  wealth.  This  great  city  is  built  upon  the  commerce 
of  the  nation  and  must  suffer  if  that  commerce  is  impaired.  You  cannot  sell 
unless  the  people  have  money  with  which  to  buy,  and  they  cannot  obtain  the 
money  with  which  to  buy  unless  they  are  able  to  sell  their  products  at  remunera- 
tive prices.  Production  of  wealth  goes  before  the  exchange  of  wealth;  those 
who  create  must  secure  a  profit  before  they  have  anything  to  share  with  others. 
You  cannot  afford  to  join  the  money  changers  in  supporting  a  financial  policy 
which,  by  destroying  the  purchasing  power  of  the  products  of  toil,  must  in  the 
end  discourage  the  creation  of  wealth. 

I  ask,  I  expect,  your  co-operation.  It  is  true  that  a  few  of  your  financiers 
would  fashion  a  new  figure — a  figure  representing  Columbia,  her  hands  bound 
fast  with  fetters  of  gold  and  her  face  turned  toward  the  East,  appealing  for 
assistance  to  those  who  live  beyond  the  sea — but  this  figure  can  never  express 
your  idea  of  this  nation.  You  will  rather  turn  for  inspiration  to  the  heroic 
statue  which  guards  the  entrance  to  your  city — a  statue  as  patriotic  in  concep- 
tion as  it  is  colossal  in  proportions.  It  was  the  gracious  gift  of  a  sister  republic 
and  stands  upon  a  pedestal  which  was  built  by  the  American  people.  That 
figure — Liberty  enlightening  the  world — is  emblematic  of  the  mission  of  our 
nation  among  the  nations  of  the  earth.  With  a  government  which  derives  its 
powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed,  secures  to  all  the  people  freedom  of 
conscience,  freedom  of  thought  and  freedom  of  speech,  guarantees  equal  rights 
to  all,  and  promises  special  privileges  to  none,  the  United  States  should  be  an 
example  in  all  that  is  good,  and  the  leading  spirit  in  every  movement  which  has 
for  its  object  the  uplifting  of  the  human  race. 

As  soon  as  I  concluded,  Mr.  Sewall  received  his  letter  of  notifica- 

19  » 


338  AT  MADISON  SQUARE  GARDEN. 

tion,  and  replied  in  a  brief  speech  which  was  well  received.  The 
speech  will  appear  in  another  chapter. 

Mrs.  Bryan  and  I  were  much  amused  the  next  morning  by  a 
newspaper  article  which  attempted  to  describe  her  appearance  during 
the  delivery  of  the  speech.  It  carried  her  through  all  the  emotions,  from 
ecstasy  to  despair.  If  the  account  had  been  founded  upon  fact  it 
would  have  justified  her  in  claiming  pre-eminence  among  the  artists 
in  facial  expression. 

After  the  notification  meeting  we  went  to  the  balcony  of  the  Bar- 
tholdi  Hotel,  where  I  spoke  for  a  few  moments  to  those  who  had  been 
unable  to  gain  entrance  to  Madison  Square  Garden.  The  following 
is  an  extract: 

Some  of  your  financiers  have  boasted  that  they  favor  gold,  but  you  shall 
teach  them  that  they  must  carry  their  ideas  far  enough  to  beHeve,  not  in  gold, 
but  in  the  golden  rule.  Our  opponents  have  been  threatening  to  organize  a 
gold  standard  Democratic  party,  but  be  not  afraid,  you  will  search  the  pages 
of  history  in  vain  to  find  a  battle  ever  won  by  an  army  of  generals.  They  have 
not  a  private  in  their  ranks.  Now,  my  friends,  I  want  you  to  set  an  example 
for  your  opponents  which  they  have  not  set  for  you.  They  have  said  that  they 
represented  the  respectable  element  of  society.  Teach  them  that  a  man's 
respectability  cannot  be  proven  by  slandering  evejy  one  who  differs  from  him  in 
opinion. 

On  the  next  day  Mr.  Sewall,  Mrs.  Bryan  and  I  received  call- 
ers at  the  Windsor  Hotel.  On  Friday  we  took  a  run  down  to  Coney 
Island  and  on  our  return  overheard  a  fellow  passenger  on  the  boat 
very  bitterly  denouncing  me.  After  he  had  exhausted  language  in 
expressing  his  contempt  for  me  and  my  supporters  he  was  introduced. 
Mrs.  Bryaji  and  I  tried  to  assure  him  that  no  harm  had  been  done  by 
his  candid  expression  of  opinion,  but  he  was  so  deeply  mortified  that 
he  did  not  enjoy  the  remainder  of  the  trip. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 


ON  THE  HUDSON. 

SATURDAY  morning  we  brought  to  a  close  our  very  pleasant 
sojourn  with  Mr.  St.  John  and  his  motlier,  and  in  company 
with  Mr.  Sewall  went  up  the  Hudson  to  Irvington,  to  spend 
the  Sabbath  with  Mr.  John  Brisbane  Walker.  Mr.  Walker's  residence 
is  surrounded  by  splendid  shade,  and  commands  a  beautiful  view  of  the 
Hudson.  Here  for  forty-eight  hours  we  enjoyed  a  season  of  rest  and 
recreation.  During  the  afternoon  Mr.  W^alker  showed  us  through 
the  building  where  his  magazine,  the  Cosmopolitan,  is  published,  and 
we  had  an  opportunity  to  examine  the  publisher's  art  in  its  highest 
state  of  perfection. 

Sunday  morning  General  Samuel  Thomas  laid  aside  his  aversion 
to  silver,  as  well  as  his  hostility  to  Democracy,  and  took  us  to  his 
church,  the  First  Presbyterian,  where  we  listened  to  a  sermon  by  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Ingham.  In  the  afternoon,  Mr.  O.  J.  Smith,  of  the  Ameri- 
can Press  Association,  an  old-time  friend,  called  with  his  wife,  and 
took  us  for  a  drive  along  the  Hudson,  through  Sleepy  Hollow,  and  to 
the  grave  of  Washington  Irving.  This,  our  first  view  of  Hudson 
river  scenery,  was  much  enjoyed.  While  at  Mr.  Walker's  we  made  the 
acquaintance  of  Mr.  W.  R.  Hearst,  of  the  New  York  Journal,  and 
Dr.  Albert  Shaw,  of  the  Review  of  Reviews. 

Although  loth  to  leave  so  delightful  a  host  and  hostess,  we  were 
compelled  to  resume  our  journey  Monday  morning.  Mr.  Sewall  went 
down  to  New  York,  and  we  accompanied  him  as  far  as  Yonkers,  where 
we  boarded  a  Hudson  river  steamer.  While  waiting  for  the  boat,  some 
one  asked  for  an  autograph,  and  we  had  a  chance  to  observe  the  effect 
of  a  precedent,  for  as  soon  as  one  request  had  been  complied  with 
another  was  made,  until  the  entire  time  of  waiting  was  occupied  in 
the  furnishing  of  autographs,  and  the  work  continued  after  the  boat 
started  until  we  were  compelled  to  suspend  it  or  miss  the  beauties  of 
the  ride.  We  were  given  a  place  in  the  pilot  house,  and  had  pointed 
out  to  us  the  various  places  of  note  along  the  river.  West  Point  was 
especially  interesting. 

At  Newburg  a  considerable  crowd  had  gathered  and  a  still  larger 
one  at  Poughkeepsie,  where  we  took  the  train  for  Barrytown.    At  the 

339 


340  ON  THE  HUDSON. 

latter  place  we  were  met  by  Mr.  and  Mrs.  E.  C.  Perrine,  and  driven 
to  their  home  at  Upper  Red  Hook,  about  six  miles  back  from  the 
river,  where  we  remained  one  week.  Mrs.  Perrine  was  Mrs.  Bryan's 
teacher  in  the  Academy  at  Jacksonville,  and  the  warm  friendship  which 
grew  up  between  them  was  continued  after  the  teacher  had  returned  to 
New  York  and  the  pupil  had  gone  to  her  Nebraska  home.  When 
we  were  casting  about  for  a  place  of  rest,  this  home  naturally  sug- 
gested itself,  and  upon  arrival  we  found  it  even  better  suited  to  our 
purpose  than  we  had  anticipated.  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Perrine  left  nothing 
undone  to  make  our  stay  enjoyable. 

Upper  Red  Hook  is  a  very  small  village,  consisting  of  a  hotel, 
a  postofifice,  a  store,  two  or  three  churches,  and  a  few  residences. 
A  spirit  of  restfulness  pervades  the  town  and  the  country  roads  fur- 
nish well-shaded  drives.  There  was  a  reception  the  evening  of  our 
arrival,  attended  by  the  neighbors  for  miles  around.  When  my  fond- 
ness for  green  corn  became  known,  the  farmers  generously  sup- 
plied our  table,  and  justice  compels  me  to  add  that  the  quality  was 
fully  equal  to  the  Nebraska  article. 

There  were  some  lakes  near  by  where  we  made  rather  an  unsuc- 
cessful attempt  at  fishing.  As  an  illustration  of  the  manner  in  which  a 
candidate's  action  is  watched  by  both  friendly  and  unfriendly  eyes,  I 
here  record  the  fact  that  as  soon  as  the  papers  announced  the  catch- 
ing of  a  fish,  I  was  at  once  warned  by  numerous  letters  not  to  fish  any 
more  during  the  campaign,  lest  I  should  offend  those  who  had  be- 
come prejudiced  against  presidential  fishing. 

One  afternoon  was  devoted  to  a  drive  down  the  river  to  Rhine- 
cliflfe  and  a  visit  to  Governor  Morton's  farm.  The  overseer  kindly 
took  us  through  the  grounds,  showed  the  ninety-acre  cornfield, 
the  wonder  of  that  portion  of  the  State,  gave  us  a  sample  of  creamery 
butter,  inducted  us  into  the  mysteries  of  incubators  and  spring  poultry, 
and  at  last  took  us  through  the  Governor's  famous  barn  and  pointed 
out  the  most  noted  of  his  herd.  On  our  return  we  stopped  for  supper 
at  Rhinebeck,  where  we  found  a  crowd  assembled  and  a  band  ready  to 
give  us  a  serenade.    My  speech  at  Rhinebeck  was  as  follows: 

Rhinebeck  Speech. 
Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I  think  I  can  go  further  even 
than  the  chairman  of  this  impromptu  meeting.  He  says  that  to  be  the 
President  of  the  United  States  is  to  be  greater  than  to  be  a  Roman,  or  a  king. 
But  few  can  be  President,  and  I  rejoice  that  I  live  in  a  land  where  to  be  a  citizen 
is  greater  than  to  be  a  king.     I   rejoice  that   I  live  in  a  land  where  those 


ON  THE  HUDSON.  341 

who  exercise  authority  derive  that  authority  from  the  consent  of  the  governed 
and  do  not  rule  by  the  right  divine. 

In  this  land,  whether  we  live  along  the  Hudson,  or  on  the  Western 
prairies,  we  stand  upon  a  common  plane  and  we  participate  in  a  government 
which  represents  us  all.  We  may  belong  to  different  parties,  but  I  trust  I  may 
be  able  to  express  the  desire  of  each  of  you,  as  well  as  of  myself,  when 
I  say  that  we  ought  to  belong  at  all  times  to  that  party  which,  in  our  judg- 
ment, will  enable  us  best  to  serve  our  country. 

Parties  are  instruments,  not  ends.  They  are  the  means  we  use  to  secure 
that  which  we  believe  to  be  best  for  us,  for  our  families,  and  for  our  fellows. 
Issues  arise  from  time  to  time,  and  it  is  the  duty  of  every  citizen  who  loves 
his  country,  and  who  appreciates  the  responsibilities  which  rest  upon  him,  to 
study  each  issue  as  it  arises. 

I  am  not  here  tonight  to  make  you  a  political  speech.  I  am  in  your 
midst  to  rest.  But  I  cannot  withstand  the  temptation  at  this  time  to  beg  that 
you  will  study,  if  you  have  not  done  so  before,  that  issue  which  in  this  cam- 
paign is  paramount.  I  know  that  among  our  neighbors  in  the  East  there 
are  many  who  have  regarded  our  position  upon  the  money  question  as  entirely 
wrong,  and  they  speak  of  the  silver  sentiment  as  a  sort  of  disease. 

I  want  to  beg  of  you,  my  friends,  to  believe  that  we,  who  advocate  the 
restoration  of  the  money  of  the  Constitution,  are  not  seeking  that  policy 
because  we  believe  that  it  is  going  to  give  us  an  advantage  over  somebody 
else.  We  have  studied  the  question  as  best  we  could,  and  we  honestly  believe 
that  there  can  be  no  permanent,  no  general  prosperity  in  this  country  until 
we  stop  the  conspiracy  of  those  who  would  make  gold  the  only  standard  of  the 
world  and  make  all  other  things  depend  upon  that  alone. 

We  believe  that  while  the  struggle  for  gold  goes  on  other  things  must 
become  cheap;  that  as  we  increase  the  demand  for  that  one  thing,  gold,  we 
must  decrease  the  price  of  all  those  things  which  are  exchanged  for  gold, 
and  we  believe  that  this  falling  of  prices,  compelled  by  legislation,  is  destructive 
of  the  energies,  the  industries  and  the  hope  of  the  toiling  masses  of  the  United 
States  and  of  the  world.  I  beg  of  you,  when  you  are  considering  this  question, 
to  remember  that  this  is  a  great  nation,  and  that  it  is  made  up  of  70,000,000 
people,  each  the  equal  of  the  other. 

I  have  visited  some  of  your  beautiful  villas  along  the  Hudson.  I  have 
been  charmed  with  their  beauty,  but  when  you  study  this  question,  remember 
that  those,  who,  instead  of  occupying  these  magnificent  places,  must  toil 
all  day  under  the  summer  sun,  have  just  as  much  interest  in  the  money 
question  as  anybody  else.  Remember,  that  this  question  cannot  be  viewed  from 
the  standpoint  of  any  class  of  people. 

It  reaches  every  man,  woman  and  child  in  the  land,  and  you  should 
make  your  view  broad  enough  to  comprehend  them  all,  because  I  believe  I 
speak  the  truth  when  I  say  that  the  prosperity  of  the  well-to-do  rests  upon 
the  prosperity  of  those  who  toil,  and  that  you  cannot  have  a  financial  policy 
which  brings  distress  to  those  who  create  wealth,  without,  in  the  end,  reaching 
those  who  rest  upon  these  toilers.  And,  more  than  that,  you  cannot  have 
a  policy  which  brings  prosperity  to  the  masses  without  the  prosperity  proving 
of    benefit    to    all    mankind. 


342  ON  THE  HUDSON. 

I  beg  that  in  your  consideration  of  this  question,  you  will  study  the  in- 
terests of  all,  and  not  merely  the  interests  of  those  who  may  be  permanently 
benefited  by  the  rise  in  the  value  of  the  dollar,  and,  when  you  have  made  up 
your  mind,  I  desire  each  of  you  to  feel  that  you  have  the  right  to  express  your 
own  view.  The  ballot  was  not  given  in  order  that  one  man  should  vote  for 
many,  or  that  one  man  should  compel  others  to  vote  with  him,  or  purchase 
their  votes. 

It  was  given  in  order  that  each  man  might  make  his  ballot  represent  a 
free  man's  will,  and,  when  each  one,  studying  as  he  will  and  voting  as  he  likes, 
expresses  himself  we  take  a  majority,  and  then  we  all  support  the  one  who  is 
elected  and  hold  up  his  hands  while  he  administers  for  us  the  government, 
whether  we  agree  with  his  views  or  not. 

Saturday  afternoon  we  visited  Madalin  and  there  I  made  my  first 
campaign  speech,  a  portion  of  which  is  given  below: 

Madalin  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  We  are  entering  upon  a  cam- 
paign which  is  a  remarkable  one  in  many  respects.  Heretofore,  at  least  during 
the  last  twenty-five  or  thirty  years,  each  party  has  gone  into  the  campaign 
practically  solid,  presenting  a  united  front  against  the  opposing  party.  But  in 
this  campaign  there  has  been  practically  a  bolt  from  every  convention  which 
has  been  held.  What  does  this  mean?  It  means  that  convictions  are  deeper 
this  year  than  they  have  been  heretofore. 

It  means  that  people  are  not  so  willing  now  as  they  have  been  to  allow 
the  platform  of  a  party  to  control  their  action.  Men  are  thinking  this  year 
with  more  of  earnestness  and  intensity  than  they  have  in  recent  years,  and 
the  results  of  this  thinking  will  be  manifested  when  the  time  comes  to  register 
the  will  of  this  great  nation,  and  between  that  time  and  this  hour  we  expect 
to  present  to  those  who  must  act  upon  the  questions  the  issues  of  this  cam- 
paign. 

When  our  party  at  Chicago  wrote  the  platform  which  it  did,  we  knew 
that  it  would  oflfend  some  people.  No  party  can  take  a  plain,  strong,  emphatic 
position  upon  any  question  without  offending  somebody.  We  declared  in  that 
platform  what  we  believed  to  be  right.  We  declared  there  the  policies  which 
we  believed  to  be  best  for  the  American  people,  and  when  we  did  it  we  knew 
that  it  would  alienate  some. 

Let  me  read  one  of  the  planks  of  that  platform: 

We  are  opposed  to  the  issuing  of  interest  bearing  bonds  of  the  United  States  in  time 
of  peace,  and  condemn  the  trafficlcing  with  banlcing  syndicates  which,  in  exchange  for 
bonds,  and  at  an  enormous  profit  to  themselves,  supply  the  Federal  Treasury  with  gold 
to  maintain  the  policy  of  gold  monometallism. 

That  is  one  of  the  planks.  That  was  not  put  in  there  to  attract  the  love 
of  those  who  have  grown  rich  out  of  the  Government's  extremities.  We  did 
not  expect  those  who  have  a  passage  way  from  the  Federal  Treasury  to  their 
offices  to  join  with  us  in  closing  up  the  passage  way.  We  did  not  expect  those 
who  are  m.aking  a  profit  out  of  a  gold  standard  and  out  of  the  embarrassment 
which  it  brings  to  the  Treasury  to  join  with  us  in  putting  an  end  to  the  gold 


ON  THB  HUDSON.  343 

standard.  Why,  if  we  had  expected  it,  we  would  have  expected  it  in  the  face 
of  all  the  history  of  the  past. 

Do  you  remember  the  Good  Book  tells  us  that  some  1800  years  ago  a  man 
named  Demetrius  complained  of  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel.  Why?  He  said, 
"It  destroys  the  business  in  which  we  are  engaged.  We  are  making  images  for 
the  worship  of  Diana,  and  these  people  say  that  they  be  not  gods  that  are  made 
with  hands." 

But  Demetrius  was  much  like  men  who  have  lived  since  his  day.  When 
he  had  made  up  his  mind  that  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  interfered  with  his 
business  he  didn't  go  out  and  say  to  the  world,  "Our  business  is  being  injured 
and  we  are  mad."  What  did  he  say?  He  said,  "Great  is  Diana  of  the 
Ephesians." 

We  have  some  today  who  are  very  much  like  Demetrius.  They  know  that 
the  restoration  of  bimetallism  destroys  the  business  in  which  they  have  been 
engaged. 

But  when  they  make  public  speeches  they  don't  say  that  the  Democratic 
party  is  wrong  because  it  interferes  with  their  business.  What  do  they  say? 
They  say  "Great  is  sound  money;  great  is  an  honest  dollar." 

I  say  this  platform  was  not  written  to  attract  their  votes.  It  was  written 
because  we  want  to  destroy  the  business  in  which  they  are  engaged.  But, 
my  friends,  if  those  who  have  made  a  profit  out  of  the  Government's  financial 
policy  array  themselves  against  the  Democratic  party,  may  or  may  we  not 
expect  those  who  believe  that  we  are  right  to  come  to  our  rescue  and  fill  up 
the  ranks  that  are  being  thus  depleted? 

If  we  must  part  company  with  those  who  believe  in  a  government  of  syn- 
dicates, by  syndicates  and  for  syndicates,  may  we  not  appeal  with  confidence 
to  those  who  believe  that  "a  government  of  the  people,  by  the  people  and 
for  the  people  should  not  perish  from  the  earth?" 

If  these  men  who  pride  themselves  upon  their  prominence  in  the  business 
world  and  who  glory  in  the  title  of  business  men  are  going  to  make  a  business 
out  of  politics,  and  are  going  to  use  their  ballots  to  increase  their  incomes, 
I  beg  you  to  consider  whether  the  great  toiling  masses  of  this  nation  have  not 
a  right  to  make  a  business  out  of  politics  once  and  protect  their  homes  and 
their   families. 

I  have  not  been  in  the  State  of  New  York  long.  I  have  not  met  many 
of  your  people.  And  yet  in  the  short  time  that  I  have  been  here  I  have  met 
enough  Republicans  who  have  told  me  that  they  were  going  to  vote  our  ticket 
to  make  up  for  every  prominent  Democrat  that  has  deserted  us.  And  we  wel- 
come the  coming  guests  as  we  speed  those  who  are  parting. 

Now,  my  friends,  this  is  a  practical  question.  It  is  a  question  which  you 
must  consider  for  yourselves. 

The  gentleman  who  has  preceded  me  has  very  properly  told  you  that  you 
are  competent  to  settle  this  question  for  yourselves.  The  founders  of  our 
Government  never  imagined  that  a  time  would  come  when  there  would  be  only 
a  few  people  in  this  country  who  would  be  competent  to  settle  a  great  public 
question.  If  they  had  they  would  have  written  in  the  Constitution  that  on  most 
questions  everybody  could  vote,   but  that  on  the   money  question   only  the 


344  ON  THE  HUDSON. 

financiers  could  vote.     It  is  hollow  mockery  to  grant  to  the  people  a  right  in 
your  Constitution  and  then  deny  them  the  privilege  of  exercising  the  right. 

People  C|n  Be  Trusted. 

I  assert  that  the  people  of  the  United  States,  those  who  produce  wealth 
as  well  as  those  who  exchange  it,  have  sufficient  patriotism  and  sufficient  intelli- 
gence to  sit  in  judgment  upon  every  question  which  has  arisen  or  which  will 
arise,  no  matter  how  long  our  Government  may  endure.  The  great  political 
questions  are  in  their  final  analysis  great  moral  questions,  and  it  requires  no 
extended  experience  in  the  handling  of  money  to  enable  a  man  to  tell  right 
from  wrong. 

And,  more  than  this,  this  money  question  will  not  be  settled  until  the  great 
common  people  act  upon  it.  No  question  is  settled  until  the  masses  settle 
it.  Abraham  Lincoln  said  that  the  Lord  must  have  loved  the  common  people," 
because  He  made  so  many  of  them.     He  was  right  about  it 

The  common  people  are  the  only  people  who  have  ever  supported  a  reform 
that  had  for  its  object  the  benefit  of  the  human  race. 

I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  there  have  not  been  exceptions  to  the  rule.  I  do 
not  mean  to  say  that  you  have  not  found  among  the  masses  at  all  times  those 
who  are  ready  to  betray  those  who  toiled  with  them  if  they  could  see  some 
chance    of   personal    elevation. 

Nor  do  I  mean  to  say  that  those  who  have  got  beyond  the  ranks  of  the 
common  people  are  entirely  unmindful  of  the  claims  of  brotherhood  upon  them. 
But  1  say  as  a  general  rule  that  the  common  people  here  and  everywhere  have 
been  the  support  and  the  only  great  support  of  every  measure  of  reform. 

Now  you  have  a  right  to  take  this  question,  examine  it,  and  form  your 
own  opinion,  and  the  ballot  is  given  to  you  in  order  that  you  may  express  your 
own  opinion  when  you  come  to  vote,  and  not  be  required  to  accept  somebody 
else's  opinion. 

And  I  am  going  to  call  your  attention  to  just  a  few  things  this  afternoon 
for  you  to  consider  when  you  are  trying  to  make  up  your  minds  what  you 
should  do. 

Our  opponents  are  all  divided  as  to  the  policy  which  should  be  pursued. 
You  take  the  gold  standard  Democrats.  Some  of  them  say  they  ought  to  come 
out  openly  and  indorse  the  Republican  candidate,  so  as  to  be  sure  and  elect 
him.  Others  say,  "No,  that  would  be  dangerous,  because  unless  we  have  a 
candidate  of  our  own  there  will  be  a  great  many  Democrats  who  will  be  foolish 
enough  to  vote  the  Democratic  ticket." 

And  there  they  are  divided.  They  all  want  the  same  object.  They  all 
want  to  elect  the  Republican  candidate,  because  they  believe  that  Democracy  is 
better  exemplified  through  Republicanism  than  through  Democracy. 

But  I  say  they  are  divided  as  to  the  means  of  getting  at  it,  and  some  say 
that  they  can  elect  the  Republican  candidate  better  by  having  a  candidae  of 
their  own  to  fool"  Democrats  with  than  they  can  by  openly  supporting  the 
Republican   ticket. 

Not  only  are  they  divided  there,  but  they  are  divided  all  the  way  through 
when  they  come  to  argument.  Why,  some  of  them  will  start  out  to  show  that 
the  gold  standard  is  a  good  thing,  and  after  one  of  their  speakers  gets  well  along 


T^^^cS,   y.   hjuHk^^  ■ 


,  ON  7 HE  HUDSON.  347 

showing  how  great  a  thing  the  gold  standard  is,  then  another  speaker  comes 
along  and  says  it  is  a  mistake  to  say  the  gold  standard  is  good,  that  the  gold 
standard  is  not  good;  that  what  we  want  is  bimetallism,  but  that  we  can't  have 
it  until  somebody  helps  us.  Now  those  two  arguments  are  not  consistent.  If 
the  gold  standard  is  a  good  thing,  why  should  they  want  bimetallism?  And  yet 
if  they  ever  have  two  men  making  speeches  the  same  night,  the  chances  are 
i6  to  I  that  one  of  them  will  praise  the  gold  standard  as  a  good  thing,  while 
the  other  will  tell  you  how  anxious  they  are  to  get  rid  of  it. 

Well,  then,  they  come  to  the  details  of  the  argument.  One  man  says  the 
reason  why  he  does  not  want  free  coinage  is  that  he  does  not  think  that  the 
Government  should  pass  a  law  that  will  enable  a  silver  miner  to  take  50  cents 
worth  of  silver  bullion  and  convert  it  into  a  hundred  cents  and  make  the 
difference. 

And  he  will  get  red  in  the  face,  and  become  indignant  at  the  idea  that  the 
Government  should  attempt  to  help  some  individual  in  this  way.  Of  course,  he 
may  have  been  in  favor  of  a  system  of  taxation  that  would  give  200  or  300  per 
cent.,  but  that  doesn't  count.  It  is  a  terrible  thing  to  allow  the  silver  miner  to 
make  that  profit. 

Then  the  next  man  who  comes  up  will  say  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  the 
stamp  of  the  Government  adds  nothing  to  the  value  of  the  metal,  and  that 
the  free  coinage  of  silver  simply  means  that  you  convert  50  cents'  worth  of 
bullion  into  a  50-cent  dollar,  and  that  nobody  makes  any  profit  out  of  it. 

I  say  that  the  chances  are  that,  if  two  men  make  speeches  on  the  same 
platform  against  our  taking  any  action  until  some  foreign  nation  helps  us, 
you  will  find  that  one  of  them  will  make  one  argument  and  the  other  will  make 
the  other  argument,  and  very  often  the  same  man  makes  both  arguments. 

Now  you  can  see  the  absurdity  of  it.  If  the  silver  miner,  under  free  coin- 
age, finds  that  his  silver  bullion  is  raised  so  that  that  which  is  now  worth  50 
cents  will  be  worth  100  cents,  then  there  will  be  no  50-cent  dollars;  and  if 
the  other  man  is  correct,  and  the  law  adds  notliing  to  the  value  of  the  metal, 
and  you  simply  convert  50  cents'  worth  of  silver  into  a  50-cent  dollar,  then  the 
mine  owner  will  not  make  a  cent. 

If  there  are  two  men  to  speak  against  our  position,  one  of  them  will 
probably  say  that  there  has  been  no  fall  in  prices,  and  he  will  denounce  the 
people  who  complain  that  gold  has  risen  in  value,  and  after  he  has  proved  that 
to  the  satisfaction  of  every  man  who  does  not  think,  then  his  colleagues  will 
come  on  and  tell  you  that  not  only  have  prices  fallen,  but  that  it  is  the  greatest 
blessing  in  the  world  to  have  prices  fall. 

Those  two  are  not  consistent,  but  it  follows  all  the  way  through.  Why  is 
it?  It  is  because  our  opponents  have  no  theory,  no  principle,  no  policy  upon 
which  they  are  prepared  to  stand  and  fight.  They  do  not  dare  to  say  that  the 
gold  standard  is  a  good  thing,  because  no  party  in  the  history  of  this  country 
has  ever  declared  in  favor  of  a  gold  standard; 'and  they  do  not  dare  to  say 
that  it  is  a  bad  thing,  and  then  tell  seventy  millions  of  liberty  loving  people 
that  they  must  suffer  until  some  foreign  nation  comes  and  brings  them  relief. 

I  want  you  to  remember  that  in  the  discussion  of  this  money  question  there 
are  certain  fundamental  principles;  and  when  you  understand  those  principles 
you  understand  the  money  question. 


348  ON  THE  HUDSON. 

What  is  the  principle  that  underlies  it  all?  It  is  that  the  law  of  supply  and 
demand  applies  to  money  as  it  does  to  everything  else. 

You  know  that  if  the  world's  crop  next  year  of  a  certain  article  is  very 
much  greater  than  the  crop  this  year,  that  article  will  fall  in  price;  if  the  crop 
is  much  smaller  than  this  year,  the  article  will  rise  in  price.  You  know  that  the 
law  of  supply  and  demand  reaches  and  controls  money,  as  well  as  other  forms 
of  property.     It  reaches  and  controls  all  sorts  of  property. 

Increase  the  amount  of  money  more  rapidly  than  the  demand  for  money 
increases,  and  you  lower  the  value  of  a  dollar;  decrease  the  quantity  of  money 
while  the  demand  for  it  increases,  and  you  increase  the  value  of  a  dollar.  When 
you  understand  that,  you  understand  the  essence  of  the  money  question.  When 
you  understand  that,  you  understand  what  its  effect  is  on  you;  and  then  you 
can  tell  where  your  interest  lies.  When  you  understand  that  principle,  then 
you  understand  why  the  great  crusade  in  favor  of  the  gold  standard  finds  its 
home  among  the  holders  of  fixed  investments,  who,  by  such  legislation,  raise 
the  value  of  the  property  which  they  hold. 

I  am  not  giving  you  my  authority  for  it;  I  can  quote  you  authority 
which  our  opponents  dare  not  question.  I  have  called  attention,  and  I  shall 
continue  to  call  attention,  to  a  remark  made  by  Mr.  Blaine  in  Congress  on  this 
subject. 

He  said  that  the  destruction  of  silver  as  money  and  the  establishing  of 
gold  as  the  sole  unit  of  value  must  have  a  ruinous  effect  upon  all  forms  of 
property,  except  those  investments  which  yield  a  fixed  return  in  money;  that 
these  would  be  enormously  enhanced  in  value  and  would  gain  a  disproportionate 
and  unfair  advantage  over  every  other  species  of  property. 

There  is  a  statement  that  no  man  who  has  respect  for  his  reputation  will 
dare  to  dispute. 

It  means  that  you  will  give  to  those  investments  and  to  this  one  form  of 
property,  money,  an  advantage  over  every  other  form  of  property. 

When  you  understand  the  effect  of  the  policy  and  then  understand  that  the 
desire  for  it  is  manifested  most  among  those  who  hold  the  fixed  investments 
or  trade  in  money,  I  think  you  will  come  to  the  conclusion  that  I  have  come 
to — that  the  fact  that  the  gold  standard  is  a  good  thing  for  them  is  the  principal 
reason  why  they  are  in  favor  of  a  gold  standard. 

When  you  make  up  your  minds  that  the  gold  standard  is  a  bad  thing, 
then  the  only  question  that  you  have  to  consider  is,  how  can  you  get  rid  of 
it?  Our  opponents  may  raise  objections  to  the  plans  which  we  propose,  but 
I  want  to  suggest  that  you  are  interested  not  so  much  in  knowing  the  objections 
to  our  plans  as  in  knowing  what  plans  they  have  to  relieve  the  condition. 

Why  don't  they  propose  something?  Is  it  because  they  don't  know  what 
ought  to  be  done?    If  so,  they  are  poor  people  to  lead  you  out  of  bondage. 

Is  it  because  they  know  and  will  not  tell?  If  so,  they  have  not  the  candor 
that  should  be  possessed  by  those  who  would  redeem  a  people  from  their 
suffering  and  distress.  They  say  that  our  dollar  will  be  a  53-cent  dollar.  They 
refuse  to  apply  to  the  silver  that  is  produced  in  the  world  the  law  of  supply 
and  demand. 

We  say,  increase  the  demand  for  silver  by  legislation  and  that  new  demand, 
acting  with  the  demand  now  in  existence,  will  operate  upon  the  price  of  silver. 


ON  THE  HUDSON.  349 

We  say  that  that  new  demand  will  be  sufficient  to  consume  all  the  silver  pre- 
sented at  the  mint,  and  being  sufficient,  will  raise  the  value  of  silver  bullion 
to  $1.29  per  ounce  throughout  the  world. 

We  have  a  reason  for  our  belief:  They  simply  say,  "It  won't  do  it;  it 
won't  do  it,"  and  then  sit  back  and  propose  absolutely  nothing. 

I  have  known  some  of  our  opponents  to  use  this  sort  of  argument:  Why, 
they  say,  if  the  free  coinage  of  silver  makes  a  silver  dollar  equal  to  a  gold 
dollar  it  will  be  just  as  hard  to  get  a  silver  dollar  as  it  is  to  get  a  gold  dollar. 
Do  you  know  what  they  overlook?  They  overlook  the  fact  that  when  we  bring 
silver  into  competition  with  gold  and  increase  the  supply  of  standard  money, 
while  a  silver  dollar  will  be  worth  as  much  as  a  gold  dollar,  it  will  be  easier  to 
obtain,  with  the  protiucts  of  toil,  a  silver  dollar  or  a  gold  dollar  than  it  is 
today. 

Our  complaint  is  that  the  same  hostile  legislation  which  has  destroyed  the 
demand  for  silver  and  driven  down  the  price  of  silver  when  measured  by  gold, 
has  also  increased  the  demand  for  gold  and  driven  up  the  price  of  gold  whfen 
measured  by  other  forms  of  property,  and  that  the  opening  of  our  mints 
to  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  will  operate  to  bring  more  money 
into  circulation,  and  thus  lessen  the  strain  upon  gold,  and  that  by  increasing 
the  demand  for  silver  we  bring  silver  up  until  silver  and  gold  meet  at  the  ratio 
now  fixed  by  law,  and  a  silver  dollar  and  a  gold  dollar  will  be  of  the  same 
value  here  and  all  over  the  world. 

After  another  Sunday's  rest  we  bade  good-bye  to  the  Perrines  and 
their  cozy  little  home,  and,  upon  invitation  of  Chairman  James  S. 
Hinckley,  of  the  New  York  State  Committee,  crossed  the  river  and 
penetrated  the  Catskills  as  far  as  Winnisook  Lodge,  a  summer  resort, 
where  Mr.  Hinckley  and  Public  Printer  Benedict,  with  their  families, 
and  a  number  of  congenial  spirits,  find  a  period  of  refreshing  rest" 
during  the  summer  months.  Our  brief  stay  at  the  Lodge  was  en- 
livened by  music  and  mfrth,  and  we  recollect  the  visit  as  one  of  the 
most  pleasant  incidents  of  the  campaign. 

The  next  day  we  returned  from  the  Lodge,  stopping  on  the  way  to 
take  dinner  at  the  Grand  Hotel.  At  Kingston  and  Hudson  large 
crowds  were  assembled,  and  short  speeches  made. 

At  Albany  we  were  met  by  ex-Senator  Norton  Chase  and  Collector 
Louis  W.  Pratt,  and  driven  to  Wolfert's  Roost,  Governor  Hill's 
suburban  home.  As  soon  as  the  Albany  meeting  was  arranged,  I  ac- 
cepted with  much  pleasure,  an  invitation  to  dine  with  Senator  Hill, 
with  whom,  notwithstanding  our  somewhat  divergent  views,  I  had  be- 
come quite  well  acquainted  while  in  Washington.  The  visit  at  his 
house  was  necessarily  brief,  owing  to  our  late  arrival  and  early  de- 
parture. There  were  at  dinner  Judge  D.  Cady  Herrick  and  wife, 
Mr.  Pratt  and  wife,  Mr.  Chase  and  wife.  General  F.  P.  Earle  and 
wife,  and  Mr.  James  Oliver,  sergeant-at-arms  of  the  National  Com- 
mittee. 


350  ON  THE  HUDSON. 

The  Albany  meeting-  was  largely  attended  and,  for  an  out-door 
meeting,  very  enthusiastic.  I  spoke  for  about  a  half  an  hour,  but 
shall  only  quote  a  few  sentences : 

Albany  Speech. 
The  Democratic  party  met  in  convention  at  Chicago,  and  a  majority  of 
the  Democrats  of  the  United  States,  speaking  through  their  regularly  chosen 
representatives,  adopted  a  platform  and  nominated  a  ticket.  It  is  not  to  be 
expected  that  every  person  will  find  in  any  platform  all  that  he  desires,  and 
nothing  that  he  does  not  like.  But  when  a  citizen  is  called  upon  to  vote,  he 
endorses  that  platform  which  gives  him  the  best  assurances  of  securing  the  most 
important  things  which  he  desires.  It  is  proper,  aye,  more,  it  is  necessary,  that 
the  candidate  who  stands  upon  a  platform  shall  endorse  the  utterances  of  the 
platform,  and  I  stand  before  you  to  declare  in  your  presence  that  I  endorse 
every  word  and  every  syllable  of  the  platform  adopted  at  Chicago.  But  while 
I  do  so,  I  expect  in  this  campaign  the  support  of  many  Democrats  who  are 
not  willing  to  endorse  all  that  the  platform  declares  for.  In  a  campaign  there 
is  always  some  overshadowing  issue;  there  is  always  some  paramount  question 
which,  more  than  any  other,  determines  the  allegiance  of  those  who  support  the 
ticket.  In  this  campaign  we  appeal  with  confidence  to  those  who  are  opposed 
to  a  longer  continuation  of  the  gold  standard  policy  by  the  United  States.  The 
Democratic  party  has  begun  a  war  of  extermination  against  the  gold  standard. 
We  ask  no  quarter;  we  give  no  quarter.  We  shall  prosecute  our  warfare 
until  there  is  not  an  American  citizen  who  dares  to  advocate  the  gold  standard. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 


FROM  ALBANY  TO  CLEVELAND. 

OUR  train  left  Albany  at  9  o'clock  and  after  making  several 
stops  reached  Utica  about  1 1 :3o.  At  Schenectady,  Amster- 
dam and  a  number  of  other  places  the  people  had  gathered 
at  the  station  to  manifest  what  friends  described  as  "interest,"  and 
what  opponents  termed  "idle  curiosity."  The  crowd  at  Utica  was  so 
large  that  it  was  difficult  to  make  them  hear  and  the  lateness  of  the 
hour  forbade  any  exended  speech.  Here  again  a  falling  platform  car- 
ried down  a  number  of  persons. 

During  the  next  day  large  meetings  were  held  at  Syracuse,  Roch- 
ester and  Erie,  with  smaller  ones  at  other  places  along  the  line.  The 
meeting  at  Syracuse  was  presided  over  by  Mayor  McGuire,  who  re- 
ferred to  the  fact  that  the  home  of  Governor  Seymour  had  been  near 
that  city,  and  this  recalled  to  my  mind  the  first  campaign  which  I  re- 
member when,  as  a  boy,  I  hurrahed  for  Seymour  and  Blair.  At 
Rochester,  ex-Secretary  of  State  Cooke  presided  and  ex-Congressman 
Greenleaf,  a  former  colleague  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  sat 
upon  the  stage. 

At  one  of  the  smaller  stations  along  the  route  a  middle-aged  farm- 
er entered  the  car.  He  wore  a  widebrimmed  hat,  and  was  in  his  shirt 
sleeves.  Standing  more  than  six  feet  in  height,  with  broad  shoulders, 
a  high  forehead  and  an  intelligent  face,  he  was  a  splendid  specimen 
of  manhood.  Coming  through  the  car  he  stopped  at  my  seat,  shook 
hands  and  said: 

"I  have  always  been  a  Republican,  but  I  am  for  silver.  We  farm- 
ers know  what  is  good  for  us,"  and  then  quickly  made  his  exit  through 
the  rear  door.  He  had  left  his  team  a  few  feet  away,  and  as  the  train 
pulled  out  we  saw  him  following  the  plow  across  the  field.  He  im- 
pressed me  as  a  typical  American  citizen,  one  who  thought  for  him- 
self and  then  made  his  vote  express  his  convictions. 

Before  reaching  Bufifalo  we  were  met  by  Hon.  Norman  E.  Mack, 
of  the  Times,  whose  gallant  fight  for  the  ticket  was  very  much  ap- 
preciated, Judge  R.  C.  Titus,  Hon.  Jacob  Stern,  and  others.  We  made 
only  a  brief  stop  at  Bufifalo  and  then  went  on  to  Erie,  Pa.,  stopping  for 
a  moment  at  Dunkirk.    The  Democratic  clubs  of  Pennsylvania  were 

351 


352  FROM  ALBANY  TO  CLEVELAND. 

assembled  in  convention  at  Erie  and  the  attendance  was  so  large  that 
three  large  halls  were  filled.  My  last  speech  was  to  the  members 
of  the  clubs  and  the  meeting  was  one  of  the  most  demonstrative  held 
in  the  East.  This  was  in  the  district  which  Mr.  Sibley  had  represented 
in  Congress,  and  in  which  he  was  again  a*  candidate.  In  a  speech 
made  the  next  morning,  at  the  close  of  a  reception  given  at  the  hotel, 
I  took  occasion  to  point  out  the  necessity  of  electing  a  Congress 
pledged  to  silver.    The  following  is  an  extract: 

Erie  Speech. 

The  people  are  engaged  in  this  fight  because  they  believe  that  the  triumph 
of  the  principles  represented  by  the  Chicago  platform  is  absolutely  essential  to 
the  welfare  of  our  nation.  This  is  not  merely  an  attempt  to  secure  the  Presi- 
dency in  order  to  divide  the  offices  among  a  few  of  the  people.  Offices  cut  no 
figure  in  this  campaign.  I  believe  my  experience  has  been  rather  an  unusual 
one.  The  people  who  have  come  to  me  have  come  with  suggestions  as  to- 
what  can  be  done  to  help  the  cause  and  no  one  has  come  to  ask  me  for  the 
promise  of  an  office  in  case  of  my  election.  I  have  not  discussed  patronage 
with  anybody.  I  shall  not  discuss  patronage  with  anybody  during  this  cam- 
paign. A  man  who  in  the  midst  of  a  great  battle  stops  to  negotiate  as  to  what 
official  position  he  is  to  occupy  when  this  battle  is  over  is  unworthy  to  hold  any 
position.  Nor  are  we  satisfied  with  securing  the  Presidency.  The  President 
alone  is  p.owerless  to  secure  legislation.  He  does  not  express  his  approval 
until  the  Senate  and  House  have  joined  in  a  measure,  and  I  appeal  to  you,  if 
you  are  interested  in  the  success  of  our  cause,  to  use  your  efforts  to  secure  a 
Senate  and  a  House,  as  well  as  a  President,  favorable  to  these  reforms.  The 
Senate  is  practically  secure.  We  have  reason  to  believe  that  the  Senate 
which  convenes  on  the  fourth  of  March  next  year  will  be  in  favor  of  the  free 
and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  present  legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i 
without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other  nation.  But  it  is  necessary 
that  we  should  have  the  House  also.  The  House  today  is  in  the  hands  of  the 
enemy  and  we  must  take  possession  of  the  House  in  order  to  put  any  good 
measure  into  operation,  and  I  beg  you  in  every  Congressional  district  in  this 
nation  to  see  to  it  that  no  man  shall  receive  a  majority  of  the  votes,  if  you  can 
help  it,  unless  he  goes  there  to  fight  for  the  money  of  the  Constitution  from 
the  day  that  he  takes  his  seat  until  the  last  day  he  occupies  a  place  in  the 
House.  You  have  in  this  district  a  man  who  has  been  tried  and  not  found  wanting. 
You  have  in  this  district  one  of  the  ablest,  one  of  the  most  fearless,  one  of  the 
most  eloquent  advocates  of  this  great  cause.  His  voice  has  been  heard  all  over 
this  land  and  you  will  be  guilty  of  a  desertion  of  this  cause  unless  you  make 
Joseph  C.  Sibley  your  member  of  Congress  at  this  election. 

I  reiterated  this  sentiment  at  every  convenient  opportunity  be- 
cause I  felt  that  the  election  of  a  bimetallist  to  the  Presidency  would 
be  of  no  avail  unless  he  was  supported  by  a  Congress  in  harmony 
with  him  on  the  money  question.    I  took  occasion  in  the  Erie  speech 


FROM  ALBANY  TO  CLBVBLAND.  353 

to  commend  my  friend  Sibley,  who  is  deserving  of  all  the  good  things 
that  can  be  said  of  any  candidate  for  office. 

We  returned  to  Buffalo  the  next  day,  and  after  a  reception  at  the 
hotel,  I  addressed  one  of  the  largest  indoor  meetings  of  the  campaign, 
and  later  spoke  from  the  balcony  of  the  hotel.  Ex-Attorney  General 
Charles  F.  Tabor  presided  at  the  first  meeting.  I  give  below  a  small 
portion  of  the  speech : 

Buffalo  Speech. 
I  am  aware  that  in  the  making  of  a  platform  it  is  impossible  to  please  all. 
I  recognize  that  people  who  think  will  differ,  and  that  a  platform  often  contains 
declarations  which  the  voter  does  not  like  and  omits  things  which  he  would  like 
to  have  included.  But  platforms  are  not  written  by  all  of  the  party;  they  are 
written  by  a  majority  of  the  party.  And  when  the  majority  writes  a  platform 
the  other  members  of  the  party  must  either  accept  it  or  get  out  of  the  party. 
Either  the  majority  must  rule  or  the  minority,  and  it  is  better  for  the  minority 
to  be  alienated  than  for  the  voice  of  the  majority  to  be  suppressed. 

Speaking  of  the  improbability  of  international  bimetallism,  I  said: 

Our  opponents  tell  us  that  they  will  try  to  secure  an  international  agree- 
ment, and  that  they  simply  desire  to  maintain  the  gold  standard  until  other 
nations  will  help  us  to  let  go.  Can  you  expect  the  restoration  of  bimetallism 
from  those  who  wrote  the  St.  Louis  platform?  Never,  until  you  can  gather 
grapes  from  thorns  and  figs  from  thistles.  Those  who  are  responsible  for  the 
gold  standard  are  not  the  ones  to  whom  we  must  look  for  deliverance.  As  well 
might  Pharaoh  have  been  expected  to  lead  the  children  of  Israel  out  of  bondage, 
as  to  expect  the  Republican  party  to  break  the  shackles  of  the  gold  standard. 

On  the  following  morning,  in  company  with  Judge  Titus,  Mr. 
Mack,  District  Attorney  Matthews  and  others  we  took  an  electric  car 
for  Niagara  Falls,  and,  after  a  view  of  the  surrounding  country  from 
the  tower,  spent  an  hour  in  a  trip  down  the  rapids  and  back.  Taking 
the  train  from  Niagara  Falls,  we  proceeded,  with  the  customary  stops 
along  the  road,  to  Knowlesville,  where  a  farmers'  picnic  was  in 
progress.  This  meeting  was  the  first  distinctively  farmers'  meeting  ad- 
dressed and  I  noted  with  much  interest  the  depth  of  feeling  manifested 
by  the  advocates  of  bimetallism  here.  The  speaker's  stand  was  built  in 
a  grove,  and  the  trees  served  as  a  gallery  for  a  large  number  of  boys 
and  young  men.  The  meeting  was  presided  over  by  Hon.  ^Marcus  A. 
Phillips,  a  former  member  of  the  Legislature,  who  left  the  Republican 
party  after  the  adoption  of  the  St.  Louis  platform.  The  presence  of  so 
many  men  who  were  engaged  in  agricultural  pursuits  led  me  to  relate 
a  conversation  which  I  had  had  only  a  few  weeks  before  with  an  old 
college  friend.  He  was  a  man  of  excellent  education  and  exemplary 
habits,  and  lived  in  Central  Illinois  upon  a  farm  of  great  fertility.     He 


354  FROM   ALBANY  TO  CLBVBLAND. 

was  telling  me  of  his  experience  upon  the  farm  and  how  impossible  it 
was  for  him  to  pay  the  rent  which  the  farm  had  formerly  brought,  and 
at  the  same  time,  out  of  his  diminishing  income,  provide  for  the  necessi- 
ties of  his  growing  family.  The  tears  filled  his  eyes  as  he  pointed  to 
three  children  playing  upon  the  floor  and  told  me  that  the  saddest  thing 
he  had  to  contemplate  was  his  inability,  under  existing  conditions,  to 
give  them  such  an  education  as  he  desired  them  to  have.  Knowing  that 
this  incident  is  multiplied  ten  thousand  times  throughout  the  land,  I 
have  found  it  diflficult  to  express,  in  language  entirely  parliamentary, 
my  indignation  when  I  consider  our  financial  system,  which  thus 
brings  privation  to  the  creators  of  wealth,  and  undeserved  advantage 
to  the  money  owners  and  money  traders,  who  advocate  the  gold 
standard  under  the  pretense  that  they  are  supporting  a  sound  financial 
system  and  an  honest  dollar. 

We  found  it  so  difficult  to  get  through  the  crowd  to  our  carriage 
that  we  missed  the  train  upon  which  we  had  intended  to  return  to 
Niagara  Falls,  and  did  not  reach  that  place  until  about  8  o'clock.  The 
time,  however,  was  pleasantly  spent  in  a  visit  to  Medina,  the  home  of 
Hon.  James  A.  Hanlan,  a  delegate  to  the  Chicago  convention,  who 
arranged  for  the  Knowlesville  meeting.  Here  we  met  two  Nebraska 
friends,  Prof.  T.  M.  Hodgman  and  wife. 

A  large  crowd  assembled  in  front  of  the  Cataract  House,  in  Niagara 
Falls,  and  I  delivered  a  speech,  rather  non-partisan  in  its  character. 
Early  next  morning  the  local  committee  took  us  out  to  the  Government 
park,  where  we  obtained  an  excellent  view  of  the  falls.  I  have  been 
deterred  from  attempting  to  describe  the  beauties  of  Niagara,  because 
the  work  has  been  so  well  done  by  other  visitors.  No  one  can  view 
the  falls  or  the  rapids  without  being  impressed  with  the  grandeur  of  this 
specimen  of  nature's  handiwork. 

The  ride  to  Hornellsville  was  made  without  any  incident  of  special 

importance.     Upon  arrival  we  found  that  Mr.  C.  A.  Dolson  had  more 

than  redeemed  the  promise  which  he  made  in  regard  to  attendance 

when  he  visited  Upper  Red  Hook  and  arranged  for  the  meeting.     The 

audience  was  mainly  agricultural,  and  yet  contained  a  larger  proportion 

of  townsfolks  than  the  Knowlesville  gathering.   I  took  occasion  here  to 

comment  upon  the  habit,  so  prevalent  among  the  advocates  of  the  gold 

standard,  of  using  obscure  and  ambiguous  terms.     The  following  is  an 

extract : 

Hornellsville  Speech, 

It  is  the  object,  or  at  least  should  be,  of  public  speakers  to  aid  their  au- 
diences to  understand  the  merits  of  disputed  questions,  and  it  is  an  evidence  of 


FROM  ALBANY   TO   CLEVELAND  355 

sincerity  of  purpose  when  a  person  discusses  public  issues  so  plainly  and  clearly 
that  one  can  understand  just  what  is  said  and  meant.  When  ambiguous 
language  is  used,  when  obscure  expressions  are  employed,  it  is  an  indication 
that  the  person  speaking  has  something  to  conceal.  The  Bible  speaks  of  cer- 
tain persons  who  love  darkness  rather  than  light,  and  it  gives  a  reason  for  that 
peculiar  affection.  Do  you  remember  what  the  reason  is?  We  are  told  that 
they  love  darkness  rather  than  light  because  their  deeds  are  evil.  Whenever  I 
find  darkness  employed  in  the  discussion  of  a  question,  or  in  the  statement  of  a 
position,  I  am  irresistibly  reminded  of  that  Bible  passage,  and  conclude  that 
the  person  who  attempts  to  be  obscure  does  so  because  he  is  not  willing  that 
the  people  should  know  what  he  believes  and  what  he  desires  to  accomplish. 
When  I  hear  a  man  talking  about  "sound  money"  without  defining  it,  I  think 
that,  perhaps,  he  loves  darkness  rather  than  light  because  his  deeds  are  evil. 

When  I  find  a  man  talking  about  an  "honest  dollar"  without  telling  what 
he  means  by  an  "honest  dollar,"  I  am  afraid  that  I  have  found  another  man 
who  loves  darkness  rather  than  light  because  his  deeds  are  evil. 

When  I  find  that  our  opponents  are  taking  their  arguments  from  people 
who  are  nameless,  I  am  afraid  that  there  is  purpose  in  the  obscurity. 

Let  me  call  your  attention  to  an  item  which  you  will  find  at  the  top  of 
the  first  column  of  the  first  page  of  the  Buffalo  Courier.  Here  it  is.  Read  the 
headlines:  "Ready  to  unload."  "India  Bankers  Hope  that  Bryan  Will  Win." 
"They  Are  Eager  to  Dump  Great  Hoards  of  Silver  by  the  Ship  Load  on  the 
United  States  Mints  and  to  Double  Its  Present  Price." 

Under  this  headline  I  find  this  special  cablegram  from  that  great  city 
whence  come  most  of  the  arguments  of  the  enemy:  "London,  England. — In 
the  course  of  an  interview  today  a  leading  India  merchant  who  has  just  returned 
from  Calcutta  said  to  me  that  (a  leading  India  merchant,  name  unknown) 
American  politics  just  now  is  of  interest  to  Hindoo  and  Parsee  bankers  and 
financiers,  as  well  as  to  native  potentates!" 

Yes,  my  friends,  American  politics  is  of  absorbing  interest  to  all  the 
nations  because  we  are  going  to  decide  to  govern  ourselves.  — "All  of  them, 
possessing  enormous  hoards  of  silver,  eagerly  desire  Bryan's  election,  and  the 
chance  thereby  afforded  them  to  dump  shiploads  of  silver  bullion  into  the 
United  States  mints  at  double  the  present  price.  So  eager  are  they  that  I 
have  heard  a  well  founded  rumor  (an  unknown  person  has  heard  a  well 
founded  rumor)  that  a  fund  has  been  started  to  aid  the  free  silver  party  by 
supplying  campaign  literature." 

That  is  the  end  of  the  quotation  from  an  unknown  India  merchant.  And  the 
cablegram  adds: 

"My  informant  is  a  man  of  such  high  commercial  standing  that  I  attach 
much  importance  to  this  interview." 

There  is  a  correspondent  who  does  not  sign  his  name,  telling  about  a  man 
of  high  commercial  standing,  whose  name  he  does  not  give,  who  quotes  from 
a  leading  merchant,  whose  name  is  unknown,  and  he  says  that  there  is  a  "well 
founded  rumor"  that  certain  things  are  going  to  happen.  That,  my  friends, 
is  the  sort  of  argument  which  is  being  spread  before  the  American  people. 
Why  don't  these  men  who  are  giving  opinions  give  their  names  also,  so  that 
we  can  find  out  who  the  men  are  and  what  their  opinions  are  worth?    But  I 

20 


356  FROM  ALBANY   TO  CLEVELAND 

am  afraid  that  they  love  darkness  rather  than  light  because  their  deeds  are 
evil.  I  call  attention  to  this  item  because  you  can  see  by  it  what  an  unsubstan- 
tial foundation  is  laid  for  the  fears  which  they  attempt  to  excite  in  the  breasts 
of  American  citizens. 

Let  me  give  you  another  evidence  of  the  lack  of  candor  and  directness 
which  characterizes  our  opponents.  Ex-Secretary  Fairchild  is  quoted  in  the 
same  paper  as  saying: 

"I  do  not  see  how  we  can  do  anything  else  than  put  a  third  ticket  in 
the  Presidential  arena.  We  have  practically  committed  ourselves  to  such  a 
course.  We  want  to  see  the  defeat  of  the  Democratic  ticket,  and  we  shall  try 
to  draw  away  as  many  votes  as  we  can  from  it.  We  feel  that  this  defeat  may 
best  be  accomplished  by  a  third  ticket.  Of  course,  we  shall  find  no  fault  with 
those  of  our  friends  who  cast  a  straight  vote  for  McKinley." 

Now  there,  my  friends,  is  a  man  who  claims  to  be  in  favor  of  honest  money, 
advocating  the  putting  up  of  a  ticket,  not  for  the  purpose  of  electing  it.  but 
for  the  purpose  of  electing  another  ticket  which  the  bolting  Democrats  are  not 
willing  to  endorse  in  convention.  I  simply  call  your  attention  to  the  methods 
which  we  have  to  meet  in  this  campaign  and  ask  you  whether  you  think  these 
methods  characterize  a  political  party  which  is  so  accustomed  to  honesty  that 
it  wants  money  honest  and  dollars  sound? 

From  Hornellsville  we  proceeded  with  but  few  stops  to  Jamestown. 
At  Celeron,  a  suburb  of  Jamestown,  more  than  12,000  people  were 
crowded  into  an  immense  auditorium.  This  was  probably  the  most 
densely  packed  hall  in  which  I  spoke,  it  being  necessary  to  suspend 
proceedings  until  a  sufficient  number  went  out  to  make  existence  bear- 
able to  those  who  remained. 

The  next  morning  we  attended  the  First  Presbyterian  Church  and 
listened  to  a  sermon  by  the  pastor.  Rev.  G.  M.  Covell.  He  discussed 
several  religious  characters  of  prominence  in  the  world's  history  and 
contrasted  the  enthusiasm  of  the  reformer  with  the  cool  and  calculating 
disposition  of  the  man  of  business.  We  spent  a  pleasant  afternoon 
at  Lakewood  with  Mr.  Mack,  of  Buffalo,  and  Hon.  Henry  W.  Cornell, 
of  New  York  City,  and  Monday  morning  left  by  boat  for  Chau- 
tauqua. 

The  visit  to  the  Chautauqua  grounds  was  very  enjoyable,  the  offi- 
cials taking  great  pains  to  show  us  the  points  of  interest.  The 
Assembly  was  not  in  session,  but  the  presence  of  a  little  crowd  in  the 
park  gave  me  an  opportunity,  of  which  I  gladly  availed  myself,  to 
express  my  high  appreciation  of  the  educational  work  inaugurated 
at  this  place.  I  noted  here  the  evenness  among  the  houses,  in  contrast 
with  the  display  sometimes  found  at  fashionable  summer  resorts.  Here 
there  seemed  to  be  a  democratic  equality  among  those  who  gathered 
to  join  intellectual  development  with  needed  recreation. 

A  call  upon  Mr.  Coleman  E.  Bishop,  then  an  invalid,  is  pleas- 
antlv  remembered. 


FROM  ALBANY  TO  CLEVELAND.  357 

We  left  the  lake  a  few  miles  further  north,  at  Maysville.  This  being 
the  home  of  Judge  Tourgee,  I  borrowed  an  illustration  from  his  works, 
and  suggested  that  the  gold  standard  was  a  device  by  which  the  pro- 
ducers of  wealth  were  compelled  to  make  "bricks  without  straw,"  and 
that  to  seek  relief  from  the  gold  standard  at  the  hands  of  the  financiers 
was  like  going  upon  "a  fool's  errand." 

The  ride  by  carriage  from  M3ysville  to  Ripley  was  a  beautiful  one. 
The  view  from  the  water  shed  between  Lake  Erie  and  Lake  Chautau- 
qua was  especially  enjoyed.  Mr.  Leroy  M.  Stringham,  of  Ripley,  is 
recalled  as  one  of  the  most  persistent  men  whom  I  met  during 
my  entire  trip.  He  was  so  urgent  in  his  efforts  to  arrange  a 
meeting  at  his  town  that  I  at  last  succumbed  with  much  the  feeling 
of  the  man  in  the  Bible  who  arose  in  the  night  and  gave  to  his  neighbor 
because  the  neighbor  would  not  allow  him  to  sleep.  The  meeting, 
however,  abundantly  repaid  me  for  the  effort  expended.  The  papers 
reported  that  one  of  the  Ripley  banks  was  robbed  while  the  cashier  was 
watching  the  parade.  I  have  been  at  a  loss  to  know  whether  this  mis- 
fortune is  properly  chargeable  to  the  silver  agitation,  or  whether  it 
should  be  construed  as  a  warning  to  banks  not  to  become  too  much 
interested  in  politics. 

This  being  the  last  meeting  in  New  York,  I  took  occasion  to  say  a 
word  to  those  who  were  to  take  part  in  the  State  convention.  As  the 
advice  here  given  was  subjected  to  criticism  in  some  quarters,  I 
quote  it: 

Ripley  Speech. 

As  this  is  my  farewell  meeting  in  the  State  for  the  present,  I  desire  to 
submit  just  a  word  to  the  Democrats  of  New  York.  I  have  been  gratified  to 
find  that  so  few — few  relatively — of  the  members  of  the  Democratic  party  are 
going  to  oppose  the  platform  and  ticket  nominated  at  Chicago. 

I  desire  to  say  a  word  to  the  Democrats  of  this  State  who  believe  that  the 
State  convention  ought  to  indorse  not  only  the  candidates  of  the  Chicago  con- 
vention, but  the  platform  on  which  the  candidates  stand.  If  there  is  any  person 
here  who  thinks  that  the  Democratic  party  of  the  State  ought  not  to  indorse 
the  candidates  and  platform,  what  I  shall  say  is  not  addressed  to  such  person, 
but  to  those  who  believe  that  the  convention  to  be  held  in  this  State  in  about 
two  weeks  should  indorse  both  platform  and  candidates  I  desire  to  offer  one 
suggestion.  We  have  had  a  great  fight  in  the  Democratic  party,  one  of  the 
most  memorable  contests  ever  waged  in  the  United  States,  and  those  who  ad- 
vocate the  free  coinage  of  silver  have  won  by  carrying  their  cause,  not  to 
conventions,  but  to  the  people  themselves,  the  source  of  all  political  power. 
If  we  had  waited  until  the  convention  assembled  at  Chicago  and  then  made  our 
appeal  to  delegates  who  had  been  sent  there  uninstructed  and  without  regard 


358  FROM  ALBANY  TO  CLEVELAND. 

to  the  money  question  we  would  have  been  defeated,  but  we  saw  that  the 
strength  of  bimetallism  was  in  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party. 

Recognizing  the  Democratic  idea  that  power  comes  up  to  the  machinery 
of  the  party  from  the  people  themselves  and  not  down  from  the  machinery  to 
the  people,  we  commenced  with  the  sovereigns,  and  instructed  the  dele- 
gates from  the  primaries  to  the  precincts,  and  from  the  precincts  to  the  county, 
and  from  the  counties  to  the  States,  and  from  the  States  to  the  national  con- 
vention. 

That  is  the  way  this  contest  has  been  fought,  and  it  is  the  only  hope  of 
those  who  are  trying  to  secure  justice  for  the  masses  of  people. 

If  you  want  the  State  convention  to  support  the  Chicago  platform  and 
ticket  there  is  only  one  way  to  be  sure  of  it,  and  that  is  to  let  no  man  go  to 
any  convention,  small  or  great,  until  you  know  where  he  stands  on  this 
question  and  that  he  stands  by  you.  No  man  who  wants  to  do  what  is  right 
will  refuse  to  let  the  people  know  what  he  will  do  when  he  gets  to  the  conven- 
tion. And  when  you  find  a  man  who  refuses  to  tell  you  what  he  is  going  to 
do,  when  you  find  a  man  who  will  not  take  you  into  his  confidence,  tell  him 
that  you  will  not  take  him  into  your  confidence. 

The  men  who  attend  conventions  do  not  go  there  as  individuals;  they  go  as 
representatives.  They  do  not  go  to  act  for  themselves;  they  go  to  act  for 
those  who  send  them.  You  not  only  have  a  right  to  know  what  a  man  is 
going  to  do  when  he  gets  there,  but  you  have  a  right  to  tell  him  what  to  do. 

From  Ripley  we  went  to  Cleveland.  Crowds  were  gathered 
at  a  number  of  places,  notably  at  Ashtabula,  O.,  where  a  number  of 
silver  Republicans  came  aboard  and  assured  me  that  they  were  vying 
with  the  Democrats  and  Populists  in  their  efforts  to  carry  the  county 
for  silver. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 


FROM  CLEVELAND  TO  CHICAGO 

ARRIVING  in  Cleveland  about  6  o'clock,  we  were  escorted  to  the 
hotel  by  an  impromptu  procession,  which  seemed  determined 
to  show  that  in  his  efforts  to  elect  a  Republican  president,  the 
chairman  of  the  Republican  National  Committee  did  not  have  the 
unanimous  support  of  his  neighbors. 

Mr.  Charles  P.  Salen,  chairman  of  the  County  Committee,  and 
Hon.  L.  E.  Holden,  of  the  Plain  Dealer,  deserve  special  credit  for  the 
success  of  the  Cleveland  meeting.  Speaking  was  arranged  for  in  two 
halls,  and  an  overflow  meeting  was  held  in  front  of  the  HoUenden 
Hotel.  I  here  met  Hon.  George  A.  Groot,  who  afterward  visited 
Nebraska  as  chairman  of  the  Notification  Committee  of  the  National 
Silver  party.  He  entered  into  the  campaign  with  great  earnestness  and 
spoke  in  several  States. 

Leaving  Cleveland  early  in  the  morning  we  proceeded  to  Columbus, 
making  several  stops  along  the  route  and  arriving  early  in  the  after- 
noon. The  Columbus  meeting  was  one  of  the  largest  held  during  the 
campaign,  in  fact,  I  am  not  sure  that  it  was  surpassed.  Hon.  Allen 
W.  Thurman,  who  presided,  has  for  several  years  been  identified  with 
the  silver  fight.  My  acquaintance  with  him  dates  from  the  silver  confer- 
ence held  in  Chicago  in  August,  1893,  he  being  the  presiding  officer  on 
that  occasion.  My  speech  at  Columbus  was  somewhat  broken  up  by 
the  fact  that  I  was  compelled  to  speak  from  the  four  sides  of  the  stand. 
I  was  followed  on  this  occasion  by  Hon.  John  L.  Lentz,  the  candidate 
for  Congress  in  that  district,  whom  I  first  met  and  listened  to  at 
Madalin,  N.  Y. 

We  went  to  Springfield  early  the  next  morning  and  there  ex- 
perienced the  most  trying  crush  of  the  campaign.  The  crowd  was 
large,  and  being  massed  in  the  hallway  through  which  we  passed,  made 
our  entrance  almost  impossible.  This  is  the  home  of  Hon.  John  W. 
Bookwalter  and  Hon.  D.  McConville,  and  I  thought  I  saw  in  the 
enthusiasm  of  the  people  evidences  of  the  effort  which  these  gentle- 

359 


360  FROM  CLEVELAND  TO  CHICAGO. 

men  have  put  forth  in  behalf  of  bimetallism.     Below  will  be  found  an 
extract  from  the  speech  delivered  at  that  place: 

Springfield  (Ohio)  Speech. 
For  a  few  moments  only  I  shall  occupy  your  attention,  because  a  large 
portion  of  my  voice  has  been  left  along  the  line  of  travel,  where  it  is  still 
calling  sinners  to  repentance.     I  am  told  that  in  this  city  you  manufacture  more 
agricultural  implements  than  are  manufactured  in  any  other  city  in  the  country. 
I  am  glad  to  talk  to  people  who  recognize  their  dependence  upon  the  farmers. 
I  have  had  occasion  to  talk  to  some  who  seem  to  imagine  that  the  harder 
they  could  make  the  condition  of  the  farmers  the  better  would  be  their  own. 
I  am  glad  to  talk  to  you  who  recognize  that  the  dollars  which  you  receive  are 
earned  first  by  those  who  convert  the  natural  resources  of  this  country  into 
money,  who  till  the  soil  and  from  its  fertility  bring  forth  this  nation's  primary 
wealth.    As  a  matter  of  fact  the  farmers  and  the  laboring  men  are  the  founda- 
tion of  society.    Upon  this  foundation  the  commercial  classes  rest,  and  the 
financier  acts  as  a  sort  of  a  roof  over  the  structure.    You  can  take  off  the  roof 
and  put  on  another,  but  you  cannot  destroy  the  foundation  without  destroying 
the  whole  building.     Goldsmith  well  expressed  it  when  he  said: 
Princes  and  lords  may  flourish  or  may  fade, 
A  breath  can  make  them,  as  a  breath  has  made. 
But  a  bold  peasantry,  a  nation's  pride. 
When   once  destroyed,   can   never  be   supplied. 

The  Democratic  party,  in  its  platform  at  Chicago,  is  pleading  the  cause 
of  a  nation's  peasantry  that  must  not  be  destroyed.  Upon  the  prosperity  of  the 
great  producers  of  wealth,  whom  we  call  the  masses,  as  distinguished  from  the 
classes,  depends  all  the  prosperity  of  this  city.  If  you  have  a  gold  standard  you 
legislate  the  value  of  property  down.  Do  you  remember  how,  when  we  were 
young,  we  used  to  play  on  the  teeter  board?  When  one  end  of  the  board  was 
up  the  other  was  down.  It  has  remained  for  modern  financiers  to  declare  that 
you  can  keep  both  ends  of  the  teeter  board  up  at  once.  They  seem  to  think 
that  money  can  be  dear  and  prices  good  at  the  same  time.  The  legis- 
lation that  increases  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar  simply  enables 
that  dollar  to  buy  more  of  other  things.  How  can  a  dollar  be  made  to  buy 
more  of  other  things?  By  making  more  wheat  sell  for  a  dollar,  more  com 
sell  for  a  dollar,  more  oats  sell  for  a  dollar,  more  potatoes  sell  for  a  dollar — 
more  of  the  products  of  toil  exchangeable  for  a  given  amount  of  money.  It 
is  a  good  thing  for  the  man  who  owns  money  and  buys  property,  but  it  is  a 
bad  thing  for  the  man  who  has  to  buy  money  with  property. 

How  does  the  gold  standard  affect  you?  You  make  your  implements  and 
sell  them  to  the  farmer.  Suppose  the  farmer  finds  that  his  taxes  do  not 
go  down,  that  his  interest  does  not  go  down,  that  his  debts  do  not  go  down, 
but  that  the  price  of  all  that  he  sells  goes  down.  What  does  it  mean?  It  means 
that  he  has  a  less  and  less  amount  to  expend  on  agricultural  implements.  He 
promises  to  pay  you,  and  legislation  destroys  his  ability  to  pay,  then  you  find 
fault  because  you  have  to  take  your  implements  back  and  sell  them  second 
hand  to  somebody  else.  That  is  the  effect  of  legislation.  Our  opponents  are 
trying  to  throw  upon  Providence  the  blame  for  our  conditions.     If  a  farmer 


FROM  CLEVELAND  TO  CHICAGO.  361 

complains  that  he  is  not  making  much  out  of  his  potato  crop  they  tell  him 
that  it  is  due  to  the  potato  bug.  If  he  does  not  make  much  out  of  corn,  they 
tell  him  that  it  is  due  to  the  chinch  bug.  But  let  me  tell  you  that  the  gold 
bug  is  destroying  more  than  all  of  them.  The  farmer  is  the  most  helpless 
victim  of  circumstances  of  all  the  producers  of  wealth.  If  a  man  is  engaged 
in  manufacturing  and  finds  the  demand  decreasing,  he  can  close  his  factory 
and  stop  the  expense  of  production,  but  the  farmer  cannot.  When  he  plants 
his  crop  in  the  spring  he  does  not  know  whether  there  is  going  to  be  a  flood 
or  a  drouth;  whether  there  will  be  hot  winds  or  cold  hail.  He  takes  his 
chances,  and,  when  he  has  taken  more  chances  than  anybody  else  and  survived 
all  the  pestilences  and  calamities  that  visit  the  farm,  it  is  not  fair  to  drive  him 
between  the  bulls  and  bears  of  Wall  street  and  let  them  take  from  him  all  that 
is  left 

The  Democrats  of  this  State  have  done  well  against  odds.  In  spite 
of  great  influences  the  Democrats  of  this  State  have  declared  for  the  restoration 
of  the  money  of  the  Constitution.  You  met  your  opponents  in  open  conflict, 
and  by  superiority  of  numbers  overcame  them.  What  did  they  do?  The  very 
people,  who  have  been  calling  all  silver  Democrats,  Populists — who  have  been 
trying  to  read  us  out  of  the  party  for  years,  when  they  found  that  they  could 
not  read  us  out,  instead  of  going  to  some  other  party  and  giving  up  the  name 
to  which  we  have  proven  our  right,  try  to  take  the  name  with  them,  and  then 
call  us  anarchists  because  we  do  not  go  with  them. 

I  understand  that  these  gold  standard  Democrats  have  declared  their  em- 
blem to  be  the  hickory  tree.  We  have  heard  about  Satan  stealing  the  livery 
of  Heaven,  but  we  have  never  before  seen  men  try  to  use  the  name  of  that 
great  hero  and  statesman  to  undo  all  that  he  tried  to  do.  Talk  about  Andrew 
Jackson  belonging  to  the  gold  Democracy!  Go  back  to  the  time  of  An- 
drew Jackson,  and  who  were  arrayed  against  him?  The  very  classes  which, 
after  having  failed  in  their  effort  to  use  the  Democratic  party  for  private  gain, 
are  now  trying  to  elect  the  Republican  candidate  for  President  by  nominating 
a  gold  standard  candidate.  Take  a  hickory  tree  for  their  emblem?  Why  do 
they  not  take  something  more  appropriate?  Why  do  they  not  put  upon  their 
ballot  the  picture  of  an  owl?  Nothing  could  be  more  appropriate.  It  looks 
wise  and  does  its  work  in  the  dark.  Or,  if  they  do  not  like  the  owl,  let  them 
take  the  mole.  It  is  a  smooth  animal  and  works  underground  all  the  time. 
But  they  ought  to  spare  the  sacred  memory  of  the  man  who  was  the  hero  of 
New  Orleans,  and  whose  resting  place,  the  Hermitage,  is  the  Mecca  of  all  who 
love  Democratic  principles  still. 

My  friends,  remember  that  relief  cannot  come  to  you  from  those  who  have 
fastened  this  yoke  upon  you.  You  may  go  to  New  York  or  Boston  and  find 
financiers  who  doubt  the  greatness  of  this  country  and  proclaim  the  necessity  for 
foreign  aid,  but  the  men  who  do  that  know  more  about  Europe  than  they  do 
about  the  United  States.  They  go  oftener  to  London  than  to  the  great  prairies 
of  the  West  and  South.  If  because  of  their  more  intimate  acquaintance  with 
foreigners  they  have  exaggerated  ideas  of  the  necessity  for  foreign  aid,  you 
people  who  live  between  the  Alleghanies  and  the  Golden  Gate — you  who  are 
willing  to  trust  your  all  upon  the  Republic  and  rise  or  fall  with  it — you  have 
the  power  and  the  right  to  take  the  reins  of  government  into  your  own  hands 


362  FROM  CLEVELAND  TO  CHICAGO. 

and  administer  the  law,  not  for  foreign  syndicates,  but  for  the  people  of  the 
United  States. 

From  this  point  we  turned  north,  stopping  at  Urbana,  Belle- 
fontaine,  Kenton,  the  home  of  Chairman  Durbin,  of  the  State  Com- 
mittee, Finlay,  Bowling  Green  and  some  other  places.  The  Kenton 
meeting  was  a  very  large  one,  and  here  a  third  platform  gave  way. 
The  Toledo  meetings,  one  outdoor  and  the  other  in  a  hall,  were 
largely  attended.  We  met  a  number  of  prominent  bimetallists  here 
and  they  made  our  stay  very  pleasant. 

From  Toledo  we  went  to  Elkhart,  Ind.,  passing  through  southern 
Michigan,  speeches  being  made  at  Adrian,  Hillsdale,  Sturgis,  Cold- 
water  and  other  places.  At  Elkhart,  Gov,  Matthews  presided  and  in- 
troduced me  to  the  large  crowd  there  assembled.  Below  will  be  found 
a  portion  of  the  speech  delivered  at  this  place: 

Elkhart^  Ind^  Railway  Sound  Money  Oubs. 

I  feel  complimented  that  the  distinguished  executive  of  this  great  State  is 
present  to  extend  a  welcome  in  person.  We  in  the  West  have  always  looked 
upon  Indiana  as  friendly  ground  and  to  her  people  as  a  people  of  congenial 
spirit.  I  am  glad  to  be  permitted  to  discuss  even  briefly  in  your  presence  the 
issues  of  this  campaign.  We  are  entering  upon  a  campaign  which  stirs  men's 
hearts,  a  campaign  which  is  drawing  out  the  interest  of  all  the  people.  I  have 
not  in  all  my  journey  from  Nebraska  to  the  sea  found  a  single  lukewarm  person. 
I  have  found  some  against  us,  but  everybody  was  for  or  against  us — no  idlers 
anywhere.  It  shows  how  the  American  people  are  realizing  their  responsi- 
bility, and  preparing  to  exercise  with  intelligence  and  patriotism  the  right 
of  suflfrage  when  election  day  arrives.  Each  one  must  decide  this  question 
for  himself.  As  we  crossed  the  bridge  I  noticed  a  sign  up,  "No  Driving 
Allowed."  Remember  that.  There  will  be  more  attempts  to  drive  in  this  cam- 
paign than  any  in  recent  years,  more  attempts  to  coerce  and  intimidate.  T 
want  you  to  have  that  phrase  printed  on  a  card  and  carry  it  wherever  you  go — 
"No  driving  allowed  in  this  campaign." 

I  find  here  a  little  slip  printed  on  paper  of  an  appropriate  color,  yellow. 

It  says:    "I,  the  undersigned ,  in  the  employ  of ."    That  is 

a  very  appropriate  blank,  because  the  man  who  issued  this  considered  the 
employe  a  blank.  "I, ,  in  the  employ  of  the Railroad  Com- 
pany, hereby  make  application  for  membership  in  the  Railway  Men's  Sound 
Money  Club."  Why  don't  they  say  gold  club?  Why  do  they  attempt  to  con- 
ceal the  word  gold  under  the  euphonious  name  of  sound  money?  (A  voice, 
"They  are  ashamed  of  it.")  Yes,  I  believe  that  is  the  reason.  "Do  hereby 
pledge  myself  to  use  my  vote  and  influence."  There  is  one  good  thing  in 
this  slip.  If  they  attempt  to  tell  you  how  to  vote  point  to  this  and  say:  "It 
is  my  vote  and  not  yours."  "And  do  hereby  pledge  myself  to  use  my  vote  and 
influence  for  the  defeat  of  free  coinage  at  the  forthcoming  election" — pay 
attention  to  this — "believing  that  such  free  coinage  of  silver  would  be  injurious 


FROM  CLEVELAND  TO  CHICAGO.  365 

to  my  personal  interests  as  an  earner  of  wages,  as  well  as  disastrous  to  the 
United  States  as  a  nation." 

If  the  wage-earner  ought  to  sign  a  statement  declaring  the  free  coinage 
of  silver  injurious  to  his  personal  interests,  I  want  to  ask  you  why  the  advo- 
cates of  the  gold  standard  who  are  engaged  in  other  kinds  of  business  do 
not  make  some  statement  in  regard  to  their  busmess?  Why  do  not  the  mem- 
bers of  the  syndicates  which  have  been  bleeding  the  United  States  Treasury 
make  application  for  membership  in  a  club  and  declare  that  the  free  coinage  of 
silver  is  injurious  to  their  personal  interests?  Why  do  not  the  bondholding 
classes  in  their  applications  state  that  it  would  be  injurious  to  their  personal 
interests?  Why  don't  the  money  changers  and  the  attorneys  of  the  great  trusts 
and  corporations  write  in  their  applications  that  the  success  of  the  Chicago 
ticket  would  be  injurious  to  their  personal  interest?  They  want  it  understood 
that  the  laboring  man  is  influenced  by  his  personal  interests,  but  that  the 
great  leaders  of  the  gold  standard  are  simply  interested  in  the  public  weal. 

It  is  only  a  short  distance  from  Elkhart  to  South  Bend,  where  the 
last  meeting  of  the  day  was  held.  Here  we  were  the  guests  of  ex-Con- 
gressman Shively,  with  whom  I  served  upon  the  Ways  and  Means 
Committee  of  the  House  of  Representatives.  Mr.  Shively  was  the 
Democratic  candidate  for  Governor  last  fall,  and  presided  at  the  meet- 
ing. Senator  Blackburn  was  present,  having  spoken  to  an  afternoon 
meeting  from  the  same  platform. 

We  reached  Chicago  early  the  following  morning  and  I  spent  the 
day  in  consultation  with  the  National  Committee.  Mrs.  Bryan  pro- 
ceeded to  Nebraska  in  the  evening. 


21 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 


AT  MILWAUKEE. 

EARLY  Saturday  morning,  in  company  with  National  Commit- 
teeman Wall  and  wife,  ex-Governor  Peck,  Mr.  F.  W.  Von- 
Cotzhausen,  and  other  members  of  the  Milwaukee  reception 
committee,  I  started  for  that  city,  speaking  briefly  at  Waukegan, 
Kenosha  and  Racine.  The  afternoon  meeting  at  the  National  Park 
was  interrupted  by  rain,  or,  rather,  would  have  been  interrupted,  but 
for  the  fact  that  the  audience  insisted  on  staying  in  spite  of  the  rain. 
Hon.  W.  C.  Silverthorne,  the  Democratic  and  fusion  candidate  for 
Governor,  presided  at  this  meeting.  The  evening  meeting  at  Schlitz 
Park  was  presided  over  by  ex-Governor  Peck.  I  quote  at  length 
from  the  speech  delivered  on  this  occasion  because  it  discussed  more 
fully  than  any  other  the  financial  policy  of  the  administration. 

Milwaukee  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I  learned  early  in  life  that  a 
public  officer  was  but  a  public  servant,  and  I  think  that  it  is  an  idea  which 
we  ought  always  to  bear  in  mind.  It  is  well  for  the  officer  himself  to  remember 
it,  and  equally  important  for  the  people  to  remember  it.  A  public  officer 
is  simply  a  hired  man  employed  at  a  fixed  salary  for  a  certain  time  to  do  cer- 
tain work.  He  is  not  in  office  merely  because  he  wants  to  be;  his  only  reason 
for  being  there  ought  to  be  that  those  whom  he  serves  want  him  to  be  there. 
In  other  words,  the  officer  is  merely  chosen  by  the  people  to  do  work  which 
they  must  have  done,  and -they  have  no  reason  for  choosing  him  except  that 
they  believe  that  he  can  do  that  work  for  them.  Officers  are  not  elected  to 
think  for  the  people;  people  are  supposed  to  think  for  themselves.  They  are 
elected  to  act  for  the  people,  simply  because  the  people  are  so  numerous  that 
they  cannot  act  for  themselves.  An  officer,  I  might  say,  is  a  necessary  evil. 
It  would  be  better  for  the  people  if  they  could  act  for  themselves,  but  that 
being  impossible,  they  must  do  the  next  best  thing  and  act  through  some  one 
else;  and  the  beauty  of  our  form  of  government  is  that,  instead  of  acting 
through  somebody  who  rules  by  right  divine,  our  people  act  through  representa- 
tives whom  they  themselves  choose  and  whom  they  can  turn  out  of  office  when- 
ever they  so  desire. 

Since  the  public  officer  is  elected  to  carry  out  your  ideas,  it  is  important 
that  you  should  know,  first,  for  what  policies  a  candidate  stands,  and  second, 
whether  he  will  carry  out  those  policies,  if  elected.  You  can  find  from  read- 
ing the  platform  upon  which  a  candidate  runs  for  what  policy  he  stands,  and 
then  you  have  to  judge  from  what  you  know  of  him  whether  he  can  be  relied 

366 


AT  MILWAUKEE.  367 

upon  to  carry  out  the  policies  which  are  presented  in  his  platform.  There 
is  no  way  of  telling  absolutely  except  by  trial.  I  come  to  you  standing  upon 
a  platform.  While  you  may  not  agree  to  everything  in  that  platform,  it  is 
only  fair  that  any  man  who  stands  upon  a  platform  should  himself  believe  in 
the  platform.  I  believe  in  the  platform,  not  because  I  stand  upon  it — I  believe 
in  it  because  it  presents  doctrines  which  I  believed  in  before  they  were  written 
in  that  platform,  and  I  have  reasons  for  the  faith  which  is  in  me.  Every  plat- 
form embraces  a  large  number  of  subjects,  because  at  all  times  government 
covers  various  questions,  but  it  is  also  true  that  in  every  election  there  is 
generally  one  issue  which  rises  above  all  other  issues  and  which,  more  than 
any  other,  engrosses  the  thoughts  of  the  people.  In  selecting  the  party  which 
he  will  support  in  any  campaign,  the  citizen  takes  the  paramount  issue,  that 
thing  which  he  thinks  is  more  important  than  other  things,  and  by  that  para- 
mount issue  determines  his  allegiance.  In  this  campaign  we  have  suffered 
some  desertions.  Why?  Because  our  platform,  departing  from  what  has 
sometimes  been  the  custom,  is  straight,  clear  and  emphatic  on  the  leading 
questions.  It  is  easy  to  hold  all  the  members  of  the  party  together  if  your 
platform  means  nothing  and  the  people  are  willing  to  submit  to  plat- 
forms which  may  mean  anything  or  nothing  according  to  construction;  but 
whenever  a  party  takes  a  firm  position  on  any  great  question,  it  must  expect 
that  those  who  do  not  believe  with  the  party  will  feel  justified  in  leaving  it, 
provided  they  can  find  somewhere  else  an  expression  of  their  ideas.  I  say, 
this  must  be  expected. 

But,  my  friends,  we  reached  a  time  when  decided  action  was  necessary. 
This  money  question  which  today  overshadows  all  other  questions  has  been 
thrust  upon  the  American  people,  not  so  much  by  the  advocates  of  free  coinage 
as  by  the  opponents  of  free  coinage.  What  has  brought  it  to  the  attention  of  the 
American  people?  As  soon  as  the  last  campaign  closed,  the  monied  interests  of 
this  country  made  a  combined  attack  on  what  was  known  as  the  Sherman  law. 
They  demanded  the  repeal  of  the  purchasing  clause  of  the  Sherman  law,  and 
they  based  their  attack  upon  the  platform  of  the  Democratic  party  of  1892; 
but  instead  of  enforcing  that  platform  as  a  whole,  they  picked  out  a  part  of 
a  sentence  and  insisted  upon  enforcing  it,  while  they  ignored  the  rest  of  the 
platform.  The  Democratic  party  denounced  the  Sherman  law  as  a  makeshift. 
What  is  a  makeshift?  Why,  it  is  a  temporary  expedient.  It  is  a  thing 
used  until  some  better  thing  can  be  secured,  and  the  very  plank  in  the  platform 
that  declared  in  favor  of  the  repeal  of  the  makeshift,  asserted  that  we  held 
to  the  use  of  gold  and  silver  as  the  standard  money  of  the  country,  and  not  that 
only,  but  that  platform  added  that  gold  and  silver  should  be  coined  without 
discrimination  against  either  metal,  or  charge  for  mintage.  This  declaration  was 
followed  by  certain  qualifying  words,  but  these  qualifying  words  did  not  destroy 
the  declaration  of  the  Democratic  party  for  the  coinage  of  gold  and  silver 
upon  equal  terms,  and  yet  the  monied  interests  of  this  country  combined  to  at- 
tack the  Sherman  law,  secure  its  repeal  and  leave  nothing  in  its  place  to  furnish 
the  money  which  the  people  need.  They  said  that  gold  was  going  abroad 
and  that  if  they  repealed  the  Sherman  law  gold  would  stop  going  abroad. 
After  a  struggle  that  has  seldom  been  equaled,  they  succeeded  in  repealing 
the  Sherman  law  without  condition,   and  then   what?     Did   gold   stop   going 


368  AT  MILWAUKEE. 

abroad?  No,  gold  went  abroad  faster  than  before;  and  then  what?  Then  they  be- 
gan to  issue  bonds  to  get  enough  gold  to  supply  those  who  wanted  to  send  it 
abroad,  or  who  wanted  to  put  it  away  in  their  vaults,  or  wanted  to  create  an 
excuse  for  the  issue  of  more  bonds.  They  issued  fifty  million  dollars'  worth 
of  bonds,  and  then  fifty  million  dollars  more  of  bonds,  and  then  the  administra- 
tion entered  into  what'  is  known  as  the  Rothschild  contract. 

My  friends,  let  me  dwell  just  a  moment  upon  that  contract.  I  call  your 
attention  to  the  fact  that  while  that  contract  was  made  by  a  Democratic  adminis- 
tration, it  was  supported  by  all  the  leading  members  of  the  Republican  party, 
and  more  than  that,  the  Republican  party  in  convention  assembled  did  not 
denounce  or  criticise  that  contract.  Why?  Because  the  men  who  wrote 
the  Republican  platform  have  always  justified  the  President's  conduct.  Now, 
I  want  to  say  to  you  that,  in  my  judgment,  that  was  the  most  infamous 
contract  that  was  ever  entered  into  by  this  nation.  That  contract  at  an  enormous 
price  employed  certain  financiers  in  New  York  and  London,  to  do  what?  To 
look  after  the  Treasury  and  protect  it.  Do  you  know  what  it  means  to  employ 
a  man  to  protect  your  treasury?  When  you  purchase  his  good  will  you  con- 
fess that  if  you  did  not  purchase  it  you  would  not  get  it,  and  when  you  buy  it 
at  a  high  price,  you  admit  that  his  good  will  is  very  valuable  to  you.  I  want 
you  to  remember,  my  friends,  that  if  this  nation  is  dependent  upon  the  good  will 
of  one  banking  firm  in  New  York  and  one  banking  firm  in  London,  the  very 
moment  you  confess  it  you  put  it  in  the  power  of  those  two  firms  to  charge 
whatever  they  please  for  their  good  will  towards  this  Government,  and  I  am  not 
willing  to  admit  that  this  Government  exists  by  sufferance.  I  am  not  willing 
to  admit  that  we  have  reached  an  extremity  where  it  becomes  necessary  for 
us  to  purchase  the  good  will  of  any  syndicate,  foreign  or  domestic.  More 
than  that,  I  assert  that  70,000,000  people,  in  their  majesty  and  strength,  have 
a  government,  or  should  have  a  goverment,  which  can  not  only  live  without 
the  aid  of  these  syndicates,  but  can  live  in  spite  of  anything  that  these  syn- 
dicates may  do.  I  am  not  surprised  that  members  of  that  syndicate  are  op- 
posed to  the  Democratic  party.  I  am  not  surprised  at  all,  because  the  Demo- 
cratic party  believes  that  this  Government  can  get  along  without  them;  and 
more  than  that,  the  Democratic  party  believes  that,  if  they  imagine  they  can 
injure  this  Government  and  dare  to  try  it,  they  ought  to  be  treated  like  any 
other  conspirators. 

Cicero,  it  is  related,  once  said  to  his  son:  "Do  not  go  into  the  retail 
business;  the  retail  business  is  a  small  and  vulgar  business.  Go  into  the  whole- 
sale business;  that  is  a  respectable  business." 

My  friends,  this  doctrine  seems  to  be  applied  to  those  who  would  injure 
the  Government.  If  a  man  attempts  to  do  the  Government  a  small  injury,  he  is 
a  contemptible  man  and  ought  to  be  punished,  but  if  he  attempts  to  do  the 
Government  a  great  injury,  he  goes  into  the  wholesale  business  and  becomes 
respectable,  and  then  the  Government  must  negotiate  with  him.  When  our 
Constitution  was  based  upon  the  theory  that  all  men  were  created  equal  and 
stood  equal  before  the  law,  there  was  no  provision  in  there  making  an  excep- 
tion in  behalf  of  financiers  and  asserting  that  they  are  greater  than  anybody 
else. 

I  warn  you,  fellow  citizens,  against  entertaining  the  opinion  of  government 


AT  MILWAUKEE.  369 

that  our  opponents  seem  to  entertain.  To  say  that  anything  less  than  a  ma- 
jority has  the  right  to  dictate  the  financial  policy  of  this  country  is  to  abandon 
the  theory  upon  which  our  Government  is  founded.  Either  the  majority  must 
rule,  or  the  minority;  and  if  a  few  people  insist  upon  making  the  laws  of  this 
country  on  any  question,  then  upon  that  question  we  have  minority  rule  instead 
of  majority  rule. 

We  may  differ  as  to  what  kind  of  financial  legislation  is  best,  but  there 
is  one  question  upon  which  we  must  agree,  if  we  believe  that  our  people 
are  capable  of  self  government  and  that  our  institutions  deserve  to  be  perpetu- 
ated. There  is  one  question  upon  which  we  must  agree,  and  that  is,  that  the 
American  people,  acting  through  their  Constitution  and  their  laws,  are  the 
only  power  to  determine  what  is  good  for  the  American  people  and  what  the 
American  people  shall  have  in  the  way  of  legislation. 

I  have  called  your  attention  to  the  Rothschild  contract.  Do  you  know 
why  that  contract  was  entered  into?  There  was  a  reason  given  and  the  only 
reasonable  one — I  do  not  mean  reasonable  to  those  who  believe  in  bimetallism — 
but  reasonable  enough  for  those  who  believe  in  the  gold  standard. 

When  the  Government  sold  bonds  at  home,  the  officials  in  charge  of 
the  Treasury  saw  that  people  went  to  the  Treasury  and  drew  out  a  part  of 
the  gold  to  pay  for  the  bonds;  therefore  the  Treasury  officials  thought  that 
they  would  try  to  sell  the  bonds  abroad  in  order  to  avoid  the  necessity  of 
furnishing  the  gold  to  pay  for  the  bonds. 

I  believe  that  if  our  people  understood  what  was  possible — what  is  not 
only  possible,  but  what  is  the  actual  practice  under  the  present  financial  system 
as  practiced  by  the  present  administration — they  would  rise  in  a  unanimous 
revolt  against  that  policy. 

Let  me  show  you  what  has  been  done.  The  Government  decided  to  issue 
$50,000,000  of  bonds  to  buy  gold.  Now  suppose  you  want  to  buy  bonds.  You 
go  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  he  says  that  he  has  some  bonds  to 
sell,  and  you  hand  him  a  thousand  dollars  in  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes. 
He  says,  "I  cannot  accept  these  notes;"  and  you  say,  "Why  not?"  Are  not  these 
greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  good?"  He  says,  "Yes,  they  are  good  for 
most  things,  but  these  bonds  are  sold  to  obtain  gold;  therefore,  we  must  demand 
gold  for  the  bonds."  You  say  to  him,  "All  right,  Mr.  Secretary,  if  you  will  not 
give  me  the  bonds  for  these  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes,  I  will  just  deposit 
them  and  demand  their  redemption  in  gold."  The  Secretary  says,  "That  is 
all  right;  that  is  what  we  are  here  for;"  and  he  hands  out  the  gold.  Then  you 
say  to  him,  "Do  I  not  understand  that  you  have  some  bonds  for  sale  for  which 
you  want  gold?"  and  he  says,  "Yes,"  and  you  hand  him  the  gold  and  say  to 
him,  "Here,  Mr.  Secretary,  is  the  gold,  now  give  me  the  bonds." 

Do  you  believe  that  that  is  possible?  It  is  possible  under  the  present 
policy.  Do  you  believe  that  anybody  in  this  country  has  done  it?  It  has  been 
done  under  the  present  administration  of  the  Treasury.  When  the  Treasurer 
issued  the  first  fifty  millions  of  dollars  of  bonds,  the  amount  of  gold  drawn 
out  during  the  time  between  the  publication  of  the  notice  and  the  issue  of  the 
bonds  was  something  like  eighteen  million  dollars.  In  other  words,  to  the 
extent  of  the  money  withdrawn  for  the  purpose  of  buying  bonds  the  Government 
simply  allowed  the  gold  to  pass  out  of  the  Treasury,  and  then  sold  bonds  to 


370  A  T  MILWA  UKEE. 

buy  it  back.  When  they  issued  the  next  fifty  million,  a  still  larger  amount  of 
gold  was  withdrawn  to  pay  for  the  bonds.  Then  they  made  the  Rothschild 
contract.  They  simply  enlarged  the  circle  a  little,  that  was  all;  and  before 
the  time  was  up,  during  which  this  syndicate  agreed  to  protect  the  Treasury, 
bonds  which  had  been  sent  to  Europe  and  sold  at  i.o^Yz  had  been  brought 
back  from  Europe  and  sold  in  the  New  York  market  for  more  than  1.20  and  the 
gold  taken  back  to  Europe  again.  This  is  financiering  as  it  is  taught  in  New 
York. 

Then  they  issued  the  next  hundred  million,  and  I  want  to  call  your  atten- 
tion to  that  issue.  It  was  first  suggested  that  the  bonds  be  issued  at  private 
sale,  and  a  syndicate  was  formed  for  the  purpose  of  purchasing  the  bonds. 
It  was  stated  in  the  paper  at  the  time  that  that  syndicate  would  give  about  1.05 
for  the  bonds.  Finally  it  was  decided  to  issue  the  bonds  at  public  auction,  and 
J.  Pierpont  Morgan,  the  head  of  the  syndicate  that  started  out  to  buy  the 
bonds  at  1.05,  within  a  few  minutes  of  the  time  for  the  opening  of  the  bids, 
handed  in  another  bid  for  i.io  and  a  fraction,  raising  the  bid  formerly  made  by 
about  five  millions  of  dollars  on  the  purchase  of  a  hundred  millions  of  dollars 
of  bonds.  What  does  that  mean?  It  means  that  these  financiers,  when  they 
thought  they  had  the  Government  at  their  mercy,  were  going  to  let  it  have 
gold  at  1.05,  but  when  others  came  in  and  offered  to  bid,  they  raised  their  bid 
more  than  five  millions  of  dollars.  What  does  that  mean?  It  means  that  these 
people  who  pose  as  guardians  of  the  Treasury — these  people  who  are  the  self- 
appointed  custodians  of  public  credit  and  national  honor — would  have  bled  the 
taxpayers  of  this  country  to  the  extent  of  five  millions  of  dollars  on  a  single  ■ 
transaction,  if  they  had  been  permitted  to  do  so.  But  that  did  not  excite  the 
indignation  of  those  who  were  standing  in  official  positions.  Not  only  did  it 
not  excite  their  indignation,  but  the  very  man  who  stood  at  the  head  of  the 
syndicate  and  tried  to  beat  the  people  of  the  United  States  out  of  five  millions  of 
dollars  was  an  honored  guest  at  a  banquet  at  which  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  was  the  chief  guest. 

Now,  my  friends,  if  we  believe  in  the  principles  upon  which  this  Government 
is  founded — if  we  believe  in  equality  before  the  law — then  I  assert  that  we  cannot 
treat  a  man  who  wants  to  beat  the  people  out  of  $5,000,000  with  more  considera^ 
tion  than  we  do  the  man  who  tries  to  beat  the  people  out  of  one  hundred  dollars 
or  out  of  five  dollars. 

When  is  this  going  to  end?  They  tell  us  that  it  is  necessary  to  maintain 
the  honor  of  the  country.  My  friends,  I  may  be  in  error,  but  I  believe  that 
the  honor  of  this  nation  can  be  better  maintained  by  intrusting  its  affairs  to  the 
seventy  millions  of  people  who  constitute  our  nation  than  by  bartering  away 
its  credit  to  a  handful  of  millionaires.  The  Republican  party  does  not  protest 
against  this  kind  of  administration  of  the  Treasury  Department.  The  Demo- 
cratic party  does  protest  against  it,  and  what  is  the  result?  Every  man  who 
has  been  profiting  out  of  the  extremities  of  the  Government,  and  using  the 
instrumentalities  of  the  Government  for  public  plunder,  has  left  our  party 
to  find  a  congenial  home  elsewhere.  They  have  left  our  party  to  find  a 
home  in  the  party  which  offers  them  a  continuation  of  that  sort  of  a  policy. 

When  will  this  policy  end?  There  is  but  one  end  to  it;  there  is  only  one 
way  to  stop  this  constant  issue  of  bonds,  and  that  is  to  return  to  the  principle 


AT  MILWAUKEE.  371 

of  bimetallism  and  allow  the  Government  to  exercise  the  option  of  redeeming 
its  coin  obligations  in  either  gold  or  silver.  When  I  have  seen  how  they  go  to 
the  Treasury  and  draw  out  the  gold  and  then  demand  bonds,  and  then  draw 
out  gold  to  pay  for  the  bonds,  and  so  on  without  limit,  I  have  been  reminded  of  a 
trick  that  a  mother  played  upon  her  boy.  He  was  taking  some  medicine  and  the 
following  dialogue  took  place  between  him  and  a  visitor:  "Do  you  like  that 
medicine?"  "No  sir."  "Well,  you  seem  to  take  it  very  nicely."  "Mamma  gives 
me  five  cents  every  time  I  take  a  dose  of  it."  "What  do  you  do  with  the 
money?"  "I  put  it  in  the  bank."  "And  what  do  you  do  with  the  money  in  the 
bank?"     "Oh,  mamma  uses  that  to  buy  more  medicine  with." 

Our  opponents  tell  us  that,  if  we  will  retire  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury 
notes,  this  drain  on  the  Treasury  will  stop.  I  ask  them  how  it  will  stop.  Why, 
they  say  that  the  banks  will  issue  paper  money  and  assume  the  obligation  of 
furnishing  whatever  gold  is  needed  for  export. 

There  is  one  thing  that  has  always  bothered  me  in  this  proposition.  If  these 
banks  are  in  earnest  in  their  desire  to  relieve  the  Treasury  Department  of  the 
burden  of  furnishing  gold  for  export,  they  need  not  change  the  law.  All  they 
need  to  do  is  to  save  up  all  the  gold  they  can  and  stand  ready  to  help  the 
Treasury  by  furnishing  it  with  that  gold.  It  does  not  need  any  statute,  my 
friends,  to  give  to  these  peo'ple,  who  seem  to  be  longing  to  help  their  country, 
an  opportunity  to  do  so.  They  can  do  it  now  without  any  change  in  the 
law.  Nothing  illustrates  their  manner  of  dealing  with  the  Government  better 
than  their  recent  conduct.  After  increasing  the  bonded  debt  of  this  country  and 
bleeding  the  Treasury  at  every  opportunity,  they  have  suddenly  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  another  bond  issue  before  election  would  have  disastrous  con- 
sequences, and,  therefore,  they  are  trying  to  bolster  up  the  Treasury  by  the 
importation  of  a  few  million  dollars  of  gold  until  after  the  emergency  is  passed. 
What  is  going  to  be  the  result  after  the  election  is  over?  The  gold  which 
they  now  furnish  in  exchange  for  Treasury  notes  and  greenbacks  can  be  with- 
drawn the  next  day  after  the  election  by  the  presentation  of  greenbacks  and 
Treasury  notes.  Having  blinded  the  people  during  the  election  period,  they  will 
then  bleed  them  for  another  four  years  until  there  is  another  election. 

I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  retirement  of  greenbacks 
and  Treasury  notes  will  not  remedy  this  condition.  The  only  reason  for  retiring 
the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  is  to  permit  the  banks  to  issue  notes  upon 
bonds  and  thus  collect  the  interest  which  the  people  now  save.  It  is  simply  a 
question  whether  the  national  banks  shall  have  this  interest  or  whether  the 
people  shall  save  it.  If  there  is  anybody  who  feels  that  he  does  not  pay  taxes 
enough — if  his  conscience  troubles  him  because  he  has  contributed  too  little 
to  the  support  of  the  Government,  let  him  make  a  voluntary  contribution  to  the 
Treasury  of  the  United  States  and  thus  relieve  his  conscience  of  the  strain  that 
is  put  upon  it.  Suppose  you  wipe  out  all  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes 
and  have  the  banks  issue  paper  money;  they  are  allowed  under  the  law  to  pay 
out  either  gold  or  silver,  just  as  the  Government  can  now.  If  the  banks  should 
refuse  to  furnish  gold  without  charging  a  premium,  would  you  not  have  the 
same  condition  which  you  have  now?  Do  you  believe  the  banks  would  always 
furnish  the  kind  of  money  which  the  people  wanted  when  they  presented  their 
notes?     If  you  think  so,  refresh  your  memories  by  going  back  to  the  time  of 


372  AT  MILWAUKEE. 

the  war.  The  national  bank  notes  are  payable  in  lawful  money,  and  a  bank  at 
any  time  during  the  war  could  redeem  its  notes  either  in  gold,  silver  or  green- 
backs. Which  did  the  banks  use?  Did  they  use  any  gold?  Oh,  no,  for  gold 
was  at  a  premium  then.  Did  they  use  any  silver?  No,  for  silver  was  at  a 
higher  premium  than  gold.  What  did  they  issue?  They  used  the  cheapest 
money  they  could  get.  The  greenbacks  were  the  money  used  to  redeem  the 
bank  notes.  The  greenback  has  always  been  as  good  as  the  bank  note,  because 
the  greenback  always  stood  behind  the  bank  note;  and  if  the  greenback  is  good 
enough  to  stand  behind  a  bank  note,  it  is  good  enough  to  stand  in  the  open  with- 
out any  bank  note  in  front  of  it.  But  suppose  we  wipe  out  the  greenbacks  and 
Treasury  notes,  then  what?  I  venture  the  assertion  that  the  very  people  who 
today  say  that  the  Government  cannot  keep  every  dollar  as  good  as  every 
other  dollar  except  by  redeeming  all  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  in  gold, 
if  gold  is  demanded — those  very  people,  if  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  are 
taken  out  of  the  way.  will  insist  that  the  Government  cannot  keep  every  dollar 
as  good  as  every  other  dollar  unless  it  stands  ready  to  redeem  every  silver  dollar 
and  every  silver  certificate  in  gold,  if  gold  is  demanded;  and  if  they  do  that  then 
they  start  another  endless  chain.  My  friends,  the  fault  is  not  with  the  green- 
back or  with  the  Treasury  note;  the  fault  is  in  the  construction  place  upon  the 
law  and  in  the  policy  of  those  who  are  in  charge  of  the  administration  of  the 
Government,  and  who  are  surrendering  the  choice  of  the  coin  to  be  used  in  pay- 
ment. We  must  either  have  two  kinds  of  money  which  are  equally  a  legal  tender 
and  can  be  used  by  the  Government  at  its  option,  or  we  must  have  only  one.  If 
we  are  going  to  have  two  kinds  of  legal  tender  money  which  the  people  can  use 
to  pay  the  debts  which  they  owe  to  the  Government,  that  money  must  be  used 
by  the  Government  in  paying  the  debts  which  it  owes  to  the  people. 

I  have  pointed  out  the  plan  by  which  we  propose  to  relieve  the  Government 
of  its  difficulties.  Let  me  leave  you  with  one  other  thought  for  your  considera- 
tion. The  Republican  party  in  its  platform  expressly  states  that  the  financial 
policy  of  this  nation  must  be  determined  by  foreign  nations  rather  than  ours. 
The  platform  says  that  the  Republican  party  pledges  itself  to  secure  international 
bimetallism  as  soon  as  possible,  but  that,  until  that  can  be  secured,  we  must 
maintain  the  gold  standard.  What  does  that  mean?  It  means  that  bimetallism 
is  better  than  a  gold  standard,  but  that  we  cannot  have  that  better  thing  until 
the  leading  commercial  nations  of  Europe  shall  consent  to  its  adoption.  Does 
it  say  that  we  must  bear  the  affliction  of  a  gold  standard  for  a  year?  No,  it  does 
not  limit  to  a  year.  For  four  years?  No,  it  does  not  limit  it  to  four  years. 
How  long?  According  to  the  Republican  platform  we  must  bear  the  affliction 
of  a  gold  standard  forever,  if  foreign  nations  insist  upon  it. 

I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  what  some  one  has  said  about  the  influence 
of  foreign  nations  and  foreign  personages  in  the  affairs  of  our  nation.  Be  silent 
while  I  read  these  words : 

Against  the  insidious  wiles  of  foreign  nations  (I  conjure  you  to  believe  me,  fellow 
citizens),  the  jealousy  of  a  free  people  ought  to  be  constantly  awake,  since  history  and 
experience  prove  that  foreign  influence  is  one  of  the  most  baneful  foes  of  republican 
government. 

There  is  the  language  which  I  desire  to  press  upon  your  memories.  It  is 
not   my   language.     Whose   language   do   you    suppose   that   it?    What   man, 


AT  MILWAUKEE.  373 

"trying  to  stir  up  the  passions  of  our  people  against  foreigners;"  what  dema- 
gogue "appealing  to  the  mob  to  justify  his  course;"  what  anarchist  do  you 
suppose  used  those  words?  Those  are  the  words  of  George  Washington.  If 
George  Washington  could  warn  his  countrymen  against  the  evil  effects  of 
foreign  influence,  if  George  Washington  could  say  to  his  countrymen  that 
foreign  influence  is  one  of  the  most  baneful  foes  to  republican  government, 
may  I  not  repeat  what  he  said  almost  one  hundred  years  after  the  date  of 
its  first  utterance?  If  it  was  true  then,  it  is  true  now.  My  friends,  I  warn 
you  against  entrusting  the  destinies  of  this  nation  to  legislative  bodies  which 
are  beyond  your  control.  How  can  you  reach  your  own  Government?  How 
can  you  change  your  own  laws?  You  can  do  it  at  the  ballot  box.  If  the 
law  is  bad  you  can  repeal  it.  If  you  want  a  good  law  enacted  you  can  write 
it  upon  the  statute  books  when  the  majority  concur.  But  suppose  you  turn 
over  to  other  nations  the  power  to  determine  when  you  shall  have  bimetal- 
lism. How  can  you  get  them  to  act?  Can  you  vote  men  into  office  in 
foreign  nations?  No,  it  is  not  within  your  power,  either  to  elect  or  discard. 
How  can  you  get  at  them?  Send  them  a  petition;  that  is  the  way  to  do 
it.  If  the  Republican  party  is  going  to  carry  out  this  policy  it  ought  to 
have  at  every  public  meeting  a  blank  petition,  to  be  signed  by  the  people 
present,  asking  foreign  nations  to  please  give  us  bimetallism.  What  is  your 
chance  by  petition?  Why,  my  friends,  for  twenty  years  and  more  the 
people  of  this  nation,  the  producers  of  wealth,  the  toiling  masses  have 
petitioned  all  parties  to  give  them  bimetallism,  and  when  the  Republican  party 
met  in  St.  Louis  the  wail  of  distress  arising  from  our  people  was  loud 
enough  to  have  been  heard  by  anybody  whose  ears  were  not  entirely  occupied 
with  the  sounds  that  come  from  Wall  street.  Did  they  hear  your  petitions? 
No,  they  disregarded  them.  I  ask  you.  Republicans,  if  the  Republican  party, 
which  you  helped  to  make,  was  deaf  to  your  entreaties,  what  hope  have  you 
of  making  an  impression  upon  foreign  legislative  bodies?  I  ask  you,  Re- 
publicans, who  have  been  the  bone  and  sinew  of  the  Republican  party  since 
the  time  it  elected  Lincoln,  if  the  Republican  party  does  not  have  mercy 
when  you  cry,  how  can  you  expect  to  find  pity  in  a  nation  from  which  your 
forfathers  wrested  the  empire  in  which  we  live?  There  are  people  who 
honestly  believe  that  this  nation  is  not  strong  enough  to  contend  against 
the  money  centers  of  the  world.  Well,  if  a  man  believes  it,  we  cannot  criticise 
him  for  expressing  his  belief  at  the  ballot  box,  but  I  want  to  ask  you, 
who,  of  the  people  who  are  opposed  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  would 
be  willing  to  print  upon  a  card,  "I  do  not  think  my  nation  is  big  enough 
to  take  care  of  itself,"  and  put  it  in  his  hat  and  wear  it  from  now  until 
election  day?  And  yet  that  is  what  every  man  says  who  says  that  we 
ought  to  get  rid  of  the  gold  standard  and  have  bimetallism,  but  that  we 
cannot   do   it   until    some   other   nations   help   us. 

I  want  to  leave  to  you  this  parting  word:  I  am  not  here  to  ask 
for  your  votes.  I  have  too  much  respect  for  the  sovereignty  of  the  citizen 
to  appeal  to  him  to  present  to  me  his  vote  as  a  gift.  It  is  his  own, 
not  to  part  with  by  begging  or  by  selling.  It  is  his  own,  not  to  surrender 
under  threat  or  coercion;  it>  is  his  own  to  do  with  what  he  pleases.  But 
when  I  surrender  all  claim  to  the  votes  of  those  who  believe  that  the  restora- 


374  AT  MILWAUKEE. 

tion  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver  by  this  nation  alone  would  be  injurious, 
I  assert  my  claims  to  the  votes  of  those  who  believe  in  the  immediate  restora- 
tion of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  present 
legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other 
nation. 

Later  I  addressed  a  large  overflow  meeting  held  near  by.  Sunday 
was  spent  at  the  hospitable  home  of  Chairman  Wall,  and  it  is  remem- 
bered as  one  of  the  most  restful  Sabbaths  of  the  campaign.  Bishop 
Samuel  Fallows,  of  Chicago,  was  in  Milwaukee  on  that  day  and  I  had 
the  pleasure  of  listening  to  him  at  the  morning  service.  The  trip  to 
Chicago  Monday  morning  was  made  without  special  incident. 


CHAPTER   XXV. 


LABOR   DAY. 


LABOR  day  deserves  a  chapter  by  itself.  An  invitation  to  speak 
in  Chicago  on  Labor  day  was  extended  to  me  soon  after  the 
National  Convention  by  the  Building  Trades  Council  of  that 
city,  but  it  was  not  until  a  short  time  before  the  day  arrived  that  I 
found  it  possible  to  give  a  definite  reply.  The  forenoon  was  devoted 
to  a  parade,  which  was  said  to  be  one  of  the  most  imposing  ever 
held  on  such  an  occasion.  During  the  forenoon  a  committee  of  horse- 
shoers  called  and  on  behalf  of  their  order  presented  a  silver  horseshoe, 
which  now  occupies  a  place  in  my  cabinet.  I  might  add  here  that 
during  the  campaign  some  twenty  horseshoes  were  received  from 
various  sources,  some  solid  silver,  some  silver-plated,  some  of  polished 
steel  and  some  old  and  rusty,  just  as  they  were  picked  up  in  the 
road.  The  horseshoe  is  said  to  bring  good  luck  to  its  possessor;  I 
leave  each  reader  to  determine  for  himself  whether  the  horseshoe 
has  lost  its  charm,  whether  too  many  horseshoes  suspend  the  oper- 
ation of  the  rule,  or  whether,  after  all,  the  result  was  fortunate 
for  me.  In  the  afternoon  a  committee  consisting  of  Messrs.  Edward 
Carroll,  president  of  the  Building  Trades  Council,  John  J.  Ryan, 
chairman  of  the  committee  of  speakers,  and  J.  D.  McKinley,  chairman 
of  the  Carpenters'  District  Committee,  called  and  accompanied  me  to 
Sharpshooters'  Park.  Here  a  large  and  enthusiastic  crowd  was  as- 
sembled.   My  speech  on  this  occasion  is  given  below: 

Labor  Day  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I  desire  to  thank  the  Building 
Trades  Council  for  the  opportunity  to  speak  to  the  people  assembled  today. 
Labor  day  has  become  a  fixed  event  among  our  holidays,  and  it  is  well 
that  it  is  so,  because  on  this  day,  all  over  the  nation,  those  who  are 
engaged  in  the  production  of  wealth  meet  with  each  other  to  discuss  the 
questions  in  which  working  men  are  especially  interested,  and  to  emphasize 
before  the  world  that  there  is  nothing  dishonorable  in  the  fact  that  one 
earns  his  bread  in  the  sweat  of  his  face.  I  am  glad  to  stand  in  the  presence 
of  those  to  whom  this  nation  is  so  largely  indebted  for  all  that  it  has  been,  for 
all  that  it  is  now,  and  for  all  that  it  can  hope  to  be. 

I  am  not  indulging  in  idle  flattery  when  I  say  to  you  that  no  other  people 

375 


376  LABOR  DAY. 

are  so  important  to  the  welfare  of  society  as  those  whose  brain  and  muscle  con- 
vert the  natural  resources  of  the  world  into  material  wealth. 

I  call  your  attention  to  the  language  of  Hon.  John  G.  Carlisle,  in  1878, 
when  he  described  these  people  as  "the  struggling  masses  who  produce  the 
wealth  and  pay  the  taxes  of  the  country."  He  did  not  praise  them  too  highly. 
"The  struggling  masses"  not  only  produce  the  wealth  and  pay  the  taxes  of  the 
country  in  time  of  peace,  but  "the  struggling  masses"  have  ever  been,  and 
must  ever  be,  the  nation's  surest  protection  in  time  of  peril. 

Abraham  Lincoln  expressed  himself  strongly  upon  this  subject.  In  a 
message  to  Congress,  in  1861,  he  said: 

Monarchy  itself  is  sometimes  hinted  at  as  a  possible  refuge  from  the  power  of 
ihe  people.  In  my  present  position  I  could  scarcely  be  justified  were  I  to  omit  raising 
a  warning  voice  against  this  approach  of  returning  despotism.  It  is  not  needed  or 
fitting  here  that  a  general  argument  should  be  made  in  favor  of  popular  institu- 
tions, but  there  is  one  point  with  its  connection  not  so  hackneyed  as  most  others,  to 
which  I  ask  a  brief  attention.  It  is  the  effort  to  place  capital  on  an  equal  footing 
with,  if  not  above,  labor  in  the  structure  of  government;  it  is  assumed  that  labor  is 
available  only  in  connection  with  capital,  that  nobody  labors  unless  somebody  else 
owning  capital  somehow,  by  the  use  of  it,  induces  him  to  labor. 

And  then  he  adds: 

Labor  is  prior  to  and  independent  of  capital.  Capital  is  only  the  fruit  of  labor, 
and  could  never  have  existed  if  labor  had  not  first  existed.  Labor  is  the  superior  of 
capital  and  deserves  much  the  higher  consideration. 

And  mark  these  words  of  his: 

No  men  living  are  more  worthy  to  be  trusted  than  those  who  toil  up  from 
poverty;  none  less  inclined  to  take  or  touch  aught  which  they  have  not  honestly 
earned.  Let  them  beware  of  surrendering  a  political  power  which  they  already  possess 
and  which,  if  surrendered,  will  surely  be  used  to  close  the  doors  of  advancement 
against  such  as  they,  and  to  fix  new  disabilities  and  burdens  upon  them  till  all  of 
liberty  shall  be  lost. 

These  are  the  words  of  Lincoln.  They  were  not  intended  to  arouse  ani- 
mosity against  capital,  but  they  state  a  great  truth  that  ought  always  to  be  re- 
membered— that  capital  is  but  the  fruit  of  labor,  and  that  labor  cannot  be 
destroyed  without  destroying  the  possibility  of  future  capital. 

I  have  quoted  from  two  of  our  public  men.  Let  me  now  read  to  you  the 
language  used  by  one  whose  words  have  won  for  him  the  title  of  the  wisest 
of  men — Solomon.     He  said: 

Give  me  neither  poverty  nor  riches;  feed  me  with  food  convenient  for  me,  lest  I 
be  full,  and  deny  Thee  and  say,  who  is  the  Lord?  Or  lest  I  be  poor,  and  steal  and  take 
the  name  of  my  God  In  vain. 

Solomon  desired  neither  poverty  nor  riches.  He  rightly  estimated  the  dangers 
which  lie  at  either  extreme  and  preferred  the — I  was  about  to  say,  golden,  but 
will  call  it  the — golden  and  silver  mean.  Neither  great  wealth  nor  abject  pov- 
erty furnishes  the  soil  in  which  the  best  civilization  grows.  Those  who  are  hard 
pressed  by  poverty  lose  the  ambition,  the  inspiration  and  the  high  purpose 
which  lead  men  to  the  greatest  achievements;  while  those  who  possess  too 
great  riches  lack  the  necessity  for  that  labor  which  is  absolutely  essential  to 
the  development  of  all  that  is  useful.  Solomon  was  right,  therefore,  when  he 
praised  the  intermediate  condition,  for  the  great  middle  classes  are  the  bul- 
wark of  society,  and  from  them  has  come  almost  all  the  good  that  has  blessed 
the  human  race. 


LABOR  DAY.  377 

The  highest  compliment  ever  paid  to  any  class  of  people  was  paid  to  those 
who  are  called  the  common  people.  When  we  use  that  term  there  are  some 
who  say  that  we  are  appealing  to  the  passions  of  the  masses;  there  are  some 
who  apply  the  name  demagogue  to  anybody  who  speaks  of  the  common  people. 
When  the  meek  and  lowly  Nazarene  came  to  preach  "peace  on  earth,  good  will 
toward  men,"  he  was  not  welcomed  by  those  who  "devour  widow's  houses  and 
for  a  pretense  make  long  prayers."  By  whom  was  he  welcomed?  The  Scrip- 
tures tell  us  that  when  he  gave  that  great  commandment,  "Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself,"  the  common  people  heard  him  gladly.  This,  1  repeat,  is 
the  highest  compliment  that  has  ever  been  paid  to  any  class  of  people,  and  the 
common  people  are  the  only  people  who  have  ever  received  gladly  the  doctrines 
of  humanity  .and  equality. 

I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  there  have  been  no  exceptions  to  the  general 
rule.  There  have  always  been  found  among  the  richer  classes  those  who 
were  filled  with  the  spirit  of  philanthropy,  those  who  were  willing  to  spend 
their  lives  in  the  uplifting  of  their  fellows.  But  I  am  now  speaking  of 
general  rules,  not  of  exceptions.  Nor  do  I  mean  that  there  have  never  been 
found  among  the  common  people  those  who  would  betray  their  fellows. 
Everywhere,  at  all  times  and  in  all  classes  of  society,  the  character  of  Judas 
has  been  found.  On  the  dark  page  of  all  history  appears  the  name  of  the 
man  who  betrays  his  brother.  Yet  in  spite  of  these  exceptions,  the  common 
people  have  been  the  great  and  controlling  force  which  has  lifted  civilization 
to  higher  ground. 

There  have  been  three  important  forms  of  government.  First,  the  mon- 
archy, in  which  the  king  rules  by  right  divine;  second,  the  aristocracy,  in  which 
the  few  govern;  and,  third,  the  democracy,  in  which  the  people  rule.  Why  is  it 
that  the  strength  of  democracy — I  do  not  use  the  word  in  a  party  sense, 
but  in  its  broader  meaning — why  is  it  that  the  strength  of  democracy  has  always 
been  found  among  the  common  people?  The  reason  is  simple  enough.  If  a 
man  has  high  position,  great  ability,  or  great  wealth  he  may  be  able  to  keep 
on  the  good  side  of  the  king.  If  he  possess  great  influence  he  may  secure  a 
place  as  one  of  the  ruling  class  in  an  aristocracy.  But  there  is  no  form  of 
government  which  the  masses  dare  leave  to  their  children  except  a  democracy 
in  which  each  citizen  is  protected  in  the  enjoyment  of  life,  liberty,  and  the  pur- 
suit of  happiness.  The  great  common  people  believe  in  a  democratic  form 
of  government  because  it  is  only  under  a  democratic  form  of  government  that 
they  are  able  to  fully  protect  their  rights  and  defend  their  interests. 

Let  me  call  your  attention  for  a  moment  to  the  objects  of  government. 
Our  Government  derives  its  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed.  What 
kind  of  government  will  people  consent  to?  Only  that  kind  which  protects 
all  and  knows  no  favoritism.  The  people  desire  a  government  in  which  all 
citizens  stand  upon  the  same  plane  without  regard  to  wealth  or  position  in 
society.  A  government  which  guarantees  equal  rights  to  all  and  confers 
special  privileges  upon  none  is  the  government  which  appeals  to  the  affections 
of  the  common  people. 

There  are  two  things  to  be  especially  considered  in  government.  The  first 
is  that  in  the  enactment  of  all  legislation  no  advantage  should  be  given  to 
one  person  over  another  if  that  advantage  can  be  avoided.     It  is  the  duty  of 


378  LABOR  DAY. 

government  to  protect  all  from  injustice  and  to  do  so  without  showing  partiality 
for  any  one  or  any  class.  Again,  government  must  restrain  men  from  injuring 
one  another.  Jefferson  declared  this  to  be  one  of  the  important  duties  of 
government,  and  the  government  which  does  not  restrain  the  strongest  citizen 
from  injuring  the  weakest  citizen  fails  to  do  its  whole  duty.  An  idea  is  the 
most  important  thing  that  a  person  can  get  into  his  head,  and  we  gather  our 
ideas  from  every  source.  I  was  passing  through  Iowa  some  months  ago  and 
got  an  idea  from  some  hogs.  I  noticed  a  number  of  hogs  rooting  in  a  field 
and  tearing  up  the  ground.  The  first  thought  that  came  to  me  was  that  they 
were  destroying  property,  and  that  carried  me  back  to  the  time  when  I  lived  on 
a  farm,  and  I  remembered  that  we  put  rings  in  the  noses  of  our  hogs.  And 
why?  Not  to  keep  the  hogs  from  getting  fat,  for  we  were  more  interested  in 
their  getting  fat  than  they  were;  the  sooner  they  became  fat,  the  sooner  we 
killed  them;  the  longer  they  were  in  getting  fat,  the  longer  they  lived.  But 
we  put  rings  in  the  noses  of  the  hogs  so  that  while  they  were  getting  fat  they 
would  not  destroy  more  property  than  they  were  worth.  And  then  it  occurred 
to  me  that  one  of  the  most  important  duties  of  government  is  to  put  rings 
in  the  noses  of  hogs.  Now,  my  friends,  do  not  consider  this  a  reflection 
upon  your  neighbor.  We  are  all  hoggish  to  a  certain  extent  and  need  re- 
straining. We  are  all  selfish  and  need  to  have  that  selfishness  curbed.  The 
Creator  did  not  make  any  class  of  people  who  are  entirely  unselfish.  I  can  prove 
by  you  that  your  neighbors  are  selfish,  and  I  can  prove  by  your  neighbors 
that  you  are  selfish,  but  I  have  faith  in  our  form  of  government  because 
the  people  in  their  better  moments  are  willing  to  enact  laws  which  will  re- 
strain them  in  the  hours  of  temptation.  We  submit  to  restraint  upon  our- 
selves in  order  that  others  may  be  restrained  from  injuring  us. 

When  I  say  that  one  of  the  duties  of  government  is  to  put  rings  in  the 
noses  of  hogs,  I  simply  mean  that,  while  society  is  interested  in  having  every 
citizen  become  independent  and  self-supporting,  that  while  society  is  interested 
in  having  every  citizen  secure  enough  of  this  world's  goods  to  supply  his  own 
wants,  educate  his  children,  and  leave  him  something  for  his  declining  days, 
.yet  society  is  also  interested  in  having  laws  which  will  prevent  any  citizen  from 
destroying  more  than  he  is  worth  while  he  is  securing  his  own  independence. 

Ours  is  the  best  form  of  government  known  among  men  because  it  can 
be  made  to  reflect  the  best'  intelligence,  the  highest  virtue,  and  the  purest 
patriotism  of  the  people.  In  other  words,  our  form  of  government  is  the  best 
because  it  can  be  made  as  good  as  we  deserve  to  have.  Let  me  warn  you 
against  confusing  government  itself  with  the  abuses  of  government.  Andrew 
Jackson  said  that  there  were  no  necessary  evils  in  government;  that  its  evils 
existed  only  in  its  abuses.  He  was  right,  my  friends.  There  are  no  necessary 
evils  in  government,  and  no  man  who  understands  the  advantages  of  govern- 
ment will  ever  raise  his  voice  or  hand  against  it.  It  is  the  abuses  of  government 
against  which  we  have  a  right  to  complain.  There  are  those  who  stand 
ready  to  denounce  as  a  disturber  of  the  public  peace  anyone  who  criticises  the 
abuses  of  government;  and  this  denunciation  is  generally  most  severe  from 
those  who  are  enjoying  the  advantages  which  arise  from  the  abuses  complained 
of.  The  reformer  is  generally  accused  of  stirring  up  discontent.  I  desire  to 
remind  you  that  discontent  lies  at  the  foundation  of  all  progress.     So  long 


LABOR  DA  Y.  379 

as  you  are  satisfied,  you  never  move  forward.  It  is  only  when  you  are  dissat- 
isfied with  present  conditions  that  you  try  to  improve  them.  Why,  my  friends, 
had  our  forefathers  been  satisfied  with  English  political  supremacy  we  never 
would  have  had  a  Declaration  of  Independence.  They  were  not  content  with 
the  conditions  under  which  they  lived,  and  they  put  that  expression  of  discon- 
tent into  the  form  of  a  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  maintained  that  decla- 
ration with  their  blood.  That  discontent  gave  us  our  form  of  government. 
There  is  one  great  difference  between  our  form  of  government  and  the 
monarchial  form.  If  the  people  are  discontented  under  a  monarchy  they  can 
petition,  but  their  petition  may  be  disregarded.  Discontent  under  a  monarchy 
may  end  in  despair  or  it  may  end  in  revolution.  Discontent  under  our  form 
of  government  ends  in  reform  through  the  peaceful  means  of  the  ballot. 

I  am  not  going  to  violate  the  proprieties  of  this  occasion  by  entering  into 
the  discussion  of  partisan  questions.  But  I  desire  to  call  your  attention  to 
certain  broad  questions  which  cannot  be  confined  within  party  lines. 

The  ballot  is  the  weapon  by  which  the  people  of  this  country  must  right 
every  legislative  wrong.  Whenever  they  lack  the  intelligence  and  patriotism 
to  right  their  wrongs  at  the  ballot  box  they  will  be  unable  to  right  them  in  any 
other  way. 

The  ballot,  to  be  effective,  must  be  used;  and  conditions  arose  in  this 
country  which  made  it  impossible  for  all  the  people  to  use  the  ballot  which 
they  had.  Because  of  the  circumstances  which  surrounded  them,  many  men 
were  afraid  to  exercise  freely  and  according  to  conscience  the  political  rights 
given  to  them  under  our  institutions.  What  did  they  do?  They  demanded 
a  reform  in  the  ballot  laws.  I  honor  the  laboring  men  of  this  country  and  the 
labor  organizations  which  stand  at  the  head  of  the  wage-earning  classes  be- 
cause they  secured  the  Australian  ballot  for  themselves  and  for  the  people  at 
large.  That  ballot  law  did  not  come  down  to  the  laboring  men  from  the 
capitalistic  classes;  it  came  as  a  result  of  their  own  demand.  The  laboring  men 
today  enjoy  the  advantages  of  the  Australian  ballot  because  they  compelled 
its  adoption. 

Among  all  the  agencies  which  for  the  past  few  years  have  been  at  work 
improving  the  condition  and  protecting  the  rights  of  the  wage  earners.  I 
believe  that  labor  organizations  stand  first.  They  have  brought  the  laboring 
men  together  where  they  could  compare  their  views,  unite  their  strength  and 
combine  their  influence,  and  we  have  these  organizations  to  thank  for  many 
of  the  blessings  which  have  been  secured  for  those  who  toil.  Some  have 
criticised  and  condemned  labor  organizations.  Some  believe  that  banks  should 
join  associations,  that  railroad  managers  should  join  associations,  that  all  the 
large  corporations  should  join  associations,  but  that  laboring  men  should  not 
organize.  Yet  labor  organizations  have  been  the  means  by  which  working  men 
have  protected  themselves  in  their  contests.  The  labor  organizations  have 
done  much  for  society  in  another  way. 

I  refer  to  the  arbitration  of  differences  between  employers  and  employes. 
That  principle  has  been  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  American  people  by  the 
laboring  men  of  the  country.  I  believe  in  arbitration.  The  principle  is  not  new; 
it  is  simply  an  extension  of  the  court  of  justice.  Arbitration  provides  an  im- 
partial tribunal  before  which  men  may  settle  their  differences  instead  of  resort- 


380  LABOR  DAY. 

ing  to  violence.  New  conditions  necessitate  new  laws.  In  former  years  when 
one  man  employed  a  few  men  to  work  for  him,  there  was  an  intimate  ac- 
quaintance between  employer  and  employe,  and  that  intimate  acquaintance 
developed  a  personal  sympathy  which  regulated  their  dealings  with  each  other. 
All  this  is  changed.  Now  when  one  corporation  employs  thousands  and  even 
tens  of  thousands  of  persons,  personal  acquaintance  between  employer  and  em- 
ploye is  impossible.  The  law  must  therefore  supply  the  element  of  justice 
which  was  formerly  supplied  by  personal  acquaintance  and  sympathy.  Arbi- 
tration is  not  only  good  for  employer  and  employe,  but  is  necessary  for  the 
security  of  society.  Society  has,  in  fact,  higher  claims  than  either  employer  or 
employe.  The  whole  people  are  disturbed  by  the  conflicts  between  labor  and 
capital,  and  the  best  interests  of  society  demand  that  these  differences  shall  be 
submitted  to  and  settled  by  courts  of  arbitration  rather  than  by  trials  of 
strength. 

I  am  not  here  to  tell  you  what  opinions  you  should  hold.  I  am  not  here  to 
discuss  the  measures  which,  in  my  judgment,  would  relieve  present  conditions. 
But  as  an  American  citizen  speaking  to  American  citizens,  I  have  a  right  to 
urge  you  to  recognize  the  responsibilities  which  rest  upon  you,  and  to  prepare 
yourselves  for  the  intelligent  discharge  of  every  political  duty  imposed  upon 
you.  Government  was  not  instituted  among  men  to  confer  special  privileges 
upon  any  one,  but  rather  to  protect  all  citizens  alike  in  order  that  they  may 
enjoy  the  fruits  of  their  own  toil.  It  is  the  duty  of  government  to  make  the 
conditions  surrounding  the  people  as  favorable  as  possible.  You  must  have 
your  opinions,  and,  by  expressing  those  opinions,  must  have  your  influence 
in  determining  what  these  conditions  shall  be.  If  you  find  a  large  number  of 
men  out  of  employment,  you  have  a  right  to  inquire  whether  such  idleness  is 
due  to  natural  laws  or  whether  it  is  due  to  vicious  legislation.  If  it  is  due  to 
legislation,  then  it  is  not  only  your  right  but  your  duty  to  change  that  legisla- 
tion. The  greatest  menace  to  the  employed  laborer  today  is  the  increasing  army 
of  the  unemployed.  It  menaces  every  man  who  holds  a  position,  and,  if  that 
army  continues  to  increase,  it  is  only  a  question  of  time  when  those  who  are,  as 
you  may  say,  on  the  ragged  edge,  will  leave  the  ranks  of  the  employed  to  join 
those  who  are  out  of  work. 

I  am  one  of  those  who  believe  that  if  you  increase  the  number  of  those 
who  cannot  find  work  and  ■  yet  must  eat,  you  will  drive  men  to  desperation 
and  increase  the  ranks  of  the  criminals  by  the  addition  of  many  who  would  be 
earning  bread  under  better  conditions.  If  you  find  idleness  and  crime  in- 
creasing, it  is  not  your  privilege  only,  it  is  a  duty  which  you  owe  to  yourselves 
and  to  your  country  to  consider  whether  the  conditions  cannot  be  improved. 

Now  a  word  in  regard  to  the  ballot.  I  beg  you  to  remember  that  it  was 
not  given  to  you  by  your  employer;  nor  was  it  given  to  you  for  his  use.  The 
right  to  vote  was  conferred  upon  you  by  law.  You  had  it  before  you  became 
an  employe;  it  will  still  be  yours  after  your  employment  ceases.  You  do  not 
tell  your  employer  that  you  will  quit  working  for  him  unless  he  votes  as  you 
desire,  and  yet  you  have  as  much  right  to  say  that  to  him  as  he  has  to  tell  you 
that  you  will  have  to  quit  working  for  him  unless  you  vote  as  he  wants  you  to. 
When  I  say  this,  I  am  not  afraid  of  offending  anybody,  for  it  is  impossible  to 
offend  an  employer  who  thinks  that  he  has  a  right  to  control  the  vote  of  his 


^^i.£^^£^c.CJt^C<^      Xt2L^,^^^^^^^^ 


LABOR  DA  Y.  383 

employe  because  he  pays  him  wages.  I  have  known  men  who  thought  that,  be- 
cause they  loaned  money  to  a  man,  he  must  vote  as  they  wanted  him  to  or  risk 
foreclosure.  I  am  not  afraid  of  oflfending  any  man  who  entertains  this  belief, 
because  a  man  who  will  use  a  loan  to  intimidate  a  citizen  or  deprive  him  of  his 
independence  has  yet  to  learn  the  genius  of  the  institutions  under  which  we  live. 
I  cannot  impress  upon  you  any  more  important  truth  than  this:  that  your 
ballot  is  your  own  to  do  with  it  what  you  please  and  that  you  have  only  to 
satisfy  your  own  judgment  and  conscience. 

There  is  one  citizen  in  this  country  who  can  prove  himself  unworthy  of 
the  ballot  which  has  been  given  to  him,  and  he  is  the  citizen  who  either  sells 
it  or  permits  it  to  be  wrested  from  him  under  coercion.  Whenever  a  man  offers 
you  pay  for  your  vote  he  insults  your  manhood,  and  you  ought  to  have  no  re- 
spect for  him.  And  the  man,  who  instead  of  insulting  your  manhood  by  an  oflfer 
of  purchase,  attempts  to  intimidate  you  to  coerce  you,  insults  your  citizenship 
as  well  as  your  manhood. 

My  friends,  in  this  world  people  have  just  about  as  much  of  good  as  they 
deserve.  At  least,  the  best  way  to  secure  anything  that  is  desirable  is  to  first 
deserve  that  thing.  If  the  people  of  this  country  want  good  laws,  they  them- 
selves must  secure  them.  If  the  people  want  to  repeal  bad  laws,  they  alone  have 
the  power  to  do  it.  In  a  government  like  ours  every  year  offers  the  citizen  an 
opportunity  to  prove  his  love  of  country.  Every  year  oflfers  him  an  opportunity 
to  manifest  his  patriotism. 

It  is  said  that  vigilance  is  the  price  of  liberty.  Yes,  it  is  not  only  the  price 
of  national  liberty,  but  it  is  the  price  of  individual  liberty  as  well.  The  citizen 
who  is  the  most  watchful  of  his  public  servants  has  the  best  chance  of  living 
under  good  laws  and  beneficent  institutions.  The  citizen  who  is  careless  and 
indifferent  is  most  likely  to  be  the  victim  of  misrule. 

Let  me  leave  with  you  this  parting  word.  Whatever  may  be  our  views  on 
political  questions,  whatever  may  be  our  positions  upon  the  issues  which  arise 
from  time  to  time,  it  should  be  the  highest  ambition  of  each  one  of  us  to  prove 
himself  worthy  of  that  greatest  of  all  names — an  American  citizen. 

Dr.  Barth,  an  eminent  German  monometallist",  who  visited  this 
country  during  the  campaign,  was  an  interested  spectator.  The  crowd 
was  so  demonstrative  in  its  evidences  of  friendhness  that  our  party 
had  difficulty  in  making  its  exit. 

Going  from  the  Labor  Day  celebration  to  the  Burlington  depot,  I 

boarded  the  train  for  the  West,  and  after  brief  stops  at  Aurora,  Men- 

dota,    Galesburg,    Monmouth,    and   a    few    other   places,    arrived    in 

Lincoln  on  Tuesday  morning.     I  give  below  a  detailed  statement  of 

route : 

Mileage  on  Second  Trip, 

Lincoln  to  Chicago,  over  Rock  Island  railway 555  miles 

Chicago  to  New  York,  over  Pennsylvania  railway 913      " 

New  York  to  Buffalo,  over  New  York  Central.. 440      " 

Buffalo  to  Erie  and  return,  over  Lake  Shore  &  Michigan 

Southern   176      " 


vO 

bJ 

, 

J 

• 

S 

o 

»o 

K) 

o 

K) 

to 

to 

O. 

a: 

ri^ 

h- 

o 

H 

z 

*o 

o 

cs 

lU 

u. 

o 

» 

\ 


^1 


f-»v 


rv. 


.^-*-. 


\ 


\ 


\ 


384 


LABOR  DAY.  385 

Buffalo  to  Niagara  Falls,  electric  line 22  miles 

Niagara  Falls  to  Knowlesville  and  return,  over  New  York 

Central 56  " 

Niagara  Falls  to  Harnellsville,  over  Erie  railway   113  " 

Hornellsville  to  Jamestown,  N.  Y.,  over  Erie  railway 116  " 

Jamestown  to  Ripley,  by  electric  car,  boat  and  buggy,  about.  30  " 
Ripley  to  Cleveland,   Ohio,  over  Lake  Shore  &  Michigan 

Southern    118  " 

Cleveland  to  Columbus,  over  Chicago,  Cincinnati,  Cleveland 

&  St.  Louis  138  " 

Columbus  to  Springfield,  over  Chicago,   Cincinnati,   Cleve- 
land &  St.  Louis  25  " 

Springfield  to  Kenton,  over  Chicago,  Cincinnati,  Cleveland 

&  St.  Louis  56  " 

Kenton  to  Toledo,  over  Toledo  &  Ohio  Central 72  " 

Toledo  to  Chicago,  over  Lake  Shore  &  Michigan  Southern  243  " 

Chicago  to  Milwaukee  and  return,  over  Northwestern  railw'y  170  " 

Chicago  to  Lincoln,  over  Burlington  railway 555  " 

Short  trips  in  neighborhood  of  Upper  Red  Hook,  N.  Y 100  " 

Total  miles  traveled  second  trip 3,898 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


THE  BOLTING  DEMOCRATS. 

SEPTEMBER  2d  the  bolting  Democrats  met  in  convention  at  In- 
dianapolis, Ind.     Ex-Gov.  Flower,  of  New  York,  was  chosen 
temporary  chairman,  and  Senator  Don  Caffery,  of  Louisiana, 
permanent  chairman.    Both  made  speeches  of  some  length  and  both 
denounced  the  Chicago  convention  and  its  nominees. 
Mr.  Flower  began  by  saying: 

Mr.  Flower^s  Speech, 

This  gathering  is  notice  lo  the  world  that  the  Democratic  party  has  not 
yet  surrendered  to  popuHsm  and  anarchy.  By  our  presence  here  we  emphasize 
the  genuine  character  of  our  democracy  and  demonstrate  the  patriotic  nature  of 
our  partisanship.  There  have  been  numerous  instances  in  poUtical  history 
where,  in  the  name  of  party  loyalty,  men  have  justified  their  non-support 
of  party  platforms  or  candidates,  and  in  many  of  such  cases  has  the  move- 
ment failed  because,  when  analyzed,  i' .  inspiring  influence  was  found  to  be 
nothing  higher  than  a  desire  to  avenge  disappointed  ambitions,  or  to  over- 
throw a  political  organization.  No  such  sordid  motive  can  be  charged  against 
this  gathering.  No  Democrat  here  sought  honors  from  those  who  framed 
the  Chicago  platform.  Every  Democrat  here  has  only  political  humiliation 
to  expect  in  the  event  of  the  success  of  the  Chicago  ticket.  No  Democrat 
honored  here  by  being  made  the  candidate  of  this  convention  can  look 
forward  with  any  reasonable  hope  to  an  election.  None  of  us  who  help 
to  nominate  him  can  expect  to  be  participants  in  any  distribution  of  political 
favors.  We  are  here  because  we  love  the  Democratic  party  and  because 
we  love  our  country.  That  is  the  inspiration  which  has  drawn  us  together 
and  encourages  our  action.  That  is  the  fact  which  evidences  our  sincerity  and 
makes  our  cause  strong  with  the  people.  Dear  to  me  are  the  teachings  of  those 
great  Democrats,  Jefferson,  Jackson  and  Tilden,  who,  if  alive  today,  would 
stand  with  us  for  party  and  public  honor.  And  because  I  love  my  party  and 
my  country  I  am  here  to  do  what  I  can  to  shield  them  from  dangerous  at- 
tack. 

The  Populist  convention  at  Chicago  did  not  realize  that  the  aspersions 
cast  by  them  would,  in  the  future,  add  luster  to  the  object  of  their  op- 
probrium. Long  after  the  festering  sores  shall  have  healed  and  shall  have 
passed  into  history  as  an  incident  as  grotesque  as  Coxey's  march  to  Wash- 
ington, there  will  stand  out  with  the  other  foremost  leaders  of  the  Democracy 
the  name  of  the  man  they  now  vilify — Grover  Cleveland. 

386 


THE  BOLTING  DEMOCRATS.  387 

Senator  CaflFery  said,  among  other  things: 

Mr,  Caffery*s  Speech. 

We  are  the  propagandists  of  no  new  creed.  We  are  the  upholders  of 
the  old.  We  appeal  from  Democracy  drunk  with  delusion  to  Democracy 
sobered  by  reason.  With  an  abiding  faith  in  the  intelligence  and  honesty  of 
our  people  we  lay  before  them  and  the  world  the  reasons  that  prompted  us 
to  unfurl  the  old  flag  that  has  floated  over  many  a  triumph  and  many  a 
defeat,  and  has  never  yet  been  soiled  by  repudiation  nor  stained  by  dishonor. 
We  deem  it  wise  to  pursue  an  aggressive  rather  than  a  negative  policy;  to 
be  Achilles  dragging  Hector  around  the  walls  of  Troy  rather  than  Achilles 
sulking  in  his  tent.  We  propose  to  make  a  funeral  pyre  of  the  cadavers  of 
populism  and  anarchy.  We  proposed  to  drag  behind  our  triumphant  chariot 
wheels,  in  defeat  and  disgrace,  around  the  National  Capital,  the  dead  Frank- 
ensteins,  personifying  their  pernicious  creed  and  their  turbulent  fanaticism. 

I  reproduce  the  money  plank  of  the  platform: 

Platform  of  Bolting  Democrats. 

The  experience  of  mankind  has  shown  that  by  reason  of  their  natural  quali- 
ties gold  is  the  necessary  money  of  the  large  affairs  of  commerce  and  business, 
while  silver  is  conveniently  adapted  to  minor  transactions,  and  the  most  beneficial 
use  of  both  together  can  be  insured  only  by  the  adoption  of  the  former  as  a 
standard  of  monetary  measure  and  the  maintenance  of  silver  at  a  parity  with 
gold  by  its  limited  coinage  under  suitable  safeguards  of  law.  Thus  the  largest 
possible  enjoyment  of  both  metals  is  gained  with  the  value  universally  accepted 
throughout  the  world,  which  constitutes  the  only  practical  bimetallic  currency, 
assuring  the  most  stable  standard,  and  especially  the  best  and  safest  money 
for  all  who  earn  a  livelihood  by  labor  or  the  produce  of  husbandry.  They 
cannot  suffer  when  paid  in  the  best  money  known  to  man,  but  are  the  pe- 
culiar and  most  defenseless  victims  of  a  debased  and  fluctuating  currency, 
which  offers  continual  profits  to  the  money  changer  at  their  cost. 

Realizing  these  truths,  demonstrated  by  long  public  inconvenience  and  loss, 
the  Democratic  party,  in  the  interest  of  the  masses  and  of  equal  justice  to 
all,  practically  established  by  the  legislation  of  1834  and  1853,  the  gold  stand- 
ard of  monetary  measurements,  and  likewise  entirely  divorced  the  govern- 
ment from  banking  and  currency  issues.  To  this  long-established  Democratic 
policy  we  adhere  and  insist  upon  the  maintenance  of  the  gold  standard  and 
of  the  parity  therewith  of  every  dollar  issued  by  the  government,  and  are 
firmly  opposed  to  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  and  to  the  com- 
pulsory purchase  of  silver  bullion. 

But  we  denounce,  also,  the  further  maintenance  of  the  present  costly 
patchwork  system  of  national  paper  currency  as  a  constant  source  of  injury  and 
peril. 

We  assert  the  necessity  of  such  intelligent  currency  reform  as  will  confine 
the  government  to  its  legitimate  functions,  completely  separated  from  the 
banking  business,  and  afford  to  all  sections  of  our  country  a  uniform,  safe 
and  elastic  bank  currency  under  government  supervision,  measured  in  volume 
by  the  needs  of  business. 


388  THE  BOLTING  DEMOCRATS. 

Senator  John  M.  Palmer,  of  Illinois,  was  nominated  for  the  Presi- 
dency, and  Gen.  Simon  B.  Buckner,  of  Kentucky,  for  the  Vice-Presi- 
dency. 

Both  candidates  received  their  notification  at  Louisville,  Ky.,  on 
the  evening  of  September  12.  Ex-Congressman  William  D.  Bynum, 
chairman  of  the  National  Committee  of  the  bolting  Democrats,  read 
messages  from  the  President  and  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  They 
were  as  follows: 

Mr.  Qevdand^s  Message. 

Buzzard's  Bay,  Mass.,  September  10. 
Hon.  William  D.  Bynum:  I  regret  that  I  cannot  accept  your  invitation 
to  attend  the  notification  meeting  on  Saturday  evening.  As  a  Democrat, 
devoted  to  the  principles  and  integrity  of  my  party,  I  should  be  delighted  to 
be  present  on  an  occasion  so  significant  and  to  mingle  with  those  who  are 
determined  that  the  voice  of  true  Democracy  shall  not  be  smothered,  and 
who  insist  that  its  glorious  standard  shall  be  borne  aloft  as  of  old,  in  faithful 
hands.  GROVER  CLEVELAND. 

Mr.  CarMe's  Message. 

Bar  Harbor,  Me.,  September  12. 
Hon.  W.  D.  Bynum:  Your  telegram  inviting  me  to  attend  the  meeting  at 
Louisville  today  has  been  forwarded  to  me  at  this  place  and  I  greatly  re- 
gret my  inability  to  accept.  The  conservative  and  patriotic  declaration  of 
the  Indianapolis  convention  on  the  public  questions  involved  in  the  pend- 
ing contest,  and  the  high  character  of  its  nominees,  cannot  fail  to  arouse 
the  real  Democratic  sentiment  of  the  country,  and  command  the  hearty  sup- 
port of  all  who  sincerely  believe  in  .the  preservation  of  the  public  honor,  the 
public  peace  and  the  stability  and  value  of  the  currency  used  by  our  people. 
I  am  proud  to  take  my  stand  with  the  old-fashioned  Democrats  who  have 
refused  to  abandon  their  honest  convictions  in  order  to  form  unnatural 
alliances  with  political  and  social  organizations,  whose  purposes  are  danger- 
ous to  the  country  and  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  fundamental  principles 
of  our  party,  and  I  pledge  to  you  and  your  associates  such  support  and 
assistance  as  I  can  properly  give  during  the  campaign. 

J.  G.  CARLISLE. 

This  meeting  inaugurated  the  campaign  of  the  gold  Democrats  and 
it  was  carried  on  with  spirit  and  aggressiveness  until  election  day. 
The  fight  made  by  them  against  the  Chicago  ticket  was  more  bitter, 
if  possible,  than  that  waged  by  the  Republicans. 

After  the  silver  Republicans  left  the  St.  Louis  convention  they 
openly  announced  their  support  of  the  Chicago  ticket,  and  through- 
out the  campaign  made  no  concealment  of  their  intention  to  assist 
it  in  every  honorable   way.     The   gold   Democrats,   however,   held 


THE  BOLTING  DEMOCRATS.  389 

meetings  for  the  ostensible  purpose  of  securing  votes  for  the  bolting 
candidates,  while  the  leaders  were  in  constant  consultation  with  the 
Republican  managers.  In  other  words,  the  silver  Republicans  were 
frank  and  candid,  while  the  gold  Democrats  resorted  to  deception.  In 
several  States  they  succeeded  in  having  their  ticket  placed  upon  the 
ofificial  ballot  as  a  Democratic  ticket,  with  the  intention  of  securing  for 
the  ticket  votes  intended  for  the  regular  ticket.  In  Nebraska  the 
bolters  left  off  the  word  "National,"  and  through  the  aid  of  Republican 
officials,  obtained  permission  to  designate  their  candidates  as  "Demo- 
crats." 

It  will  be  noticed  that  Mr.  Flower  expressed  a  love  for  the  teach- 
ings of  Jefferson  and  Jackson,  and  a  similar  position  was  taken  by 
the  most  prominent  gold  Democrats.  While  no  legal  procedure  can 
be  invoked  to  determine  which  branch  of  the  party  has  the  best  right 
to  claim  allegiance  to  the  principles  of  Jefferson  and  Jackson,  it  is 
worth  while  to  remember  that  the  position  taken  by  the  gold  Demo- 
crats during  the  campaign  just  closed  was  on  many  points  in  direct 
antagonism  to  the  views  held  by  the  founders  of  the  party.  For 
instance,  Jefferson  was  the  lifelong  enemy  of  banks  of  issue,  carry- 
ing his  opposition  to  such  an  extent  that  he  was  called  a  maniac 
by  the  friends  of  bank  currency.  Andrew  Jackson  won  his  greatest 
civil  victory  in  his  contest  with  the  national  bank  of  that  day.  The 
gold  Democrats,  on  the  other  hand,  support  the  national  bank  as  a 
bank  of  issue  and  desire  to  increase,  rather  than  diminish,  its  privi- 
leges. Jefferson  believed  that  the  monetary  unit  should  rest  upon 
two  metals  and  Jackson,  when  president,  signed  a  coinage  bill  identi- 
cal with  the  one  which  the  advocates  of  free  coinage  wish  to  enact, 
while  the  gold  Democrats  in  the  platform  adopted  at  Indianapolis 
express  no  desire  for  the  double  standard.  But  when  the  campaign 
is  considered  in  a  broader  sense  it  will  be  found  that  the  gold  Demo- 
crats threw  their  influence  with  the  very  classes  which  most  vehemently 
opposed  Jefferson  and  Jackson. 

Parton,  in  his  life  of  Jackson,  says: 

In  these  Jacksonian  contests,  therefore,  we  find  nearly  all  the  talent,  nearly 
all  the  learning,  nearly  all  the  ancient  wealth,  nearly  all  the  business  ac- 
tivity, nearly  all  the  book-nourished  intelligence,  nearly  all  the  silver-forked 
civilization  of  the  country,  united  in  opposition  to  General  Jackson,  who 
represented  the  country's  untutored  instincts. 

The  same  language  might  be  used  to  describe  the  opposition  to 
Jefferson. 

Did  not  the  gold  Democrats  boast  that  they  had  on  their  side  the 


390  THE  BOLTING  DEMOCRATS. 

same  social  and  political  elements  described  by  Parton?  Then,  too, 
in  bitterness  and  invective,  the  gold  Democrats  were  quite  similar 
to  the  opponents  of  Jefferson  and  Jackson,  both  of  whom  were  assailed 
in  language  which  found  its  counterpart  during  the  last  few  months. 
As  illustrative  of  the  second  Jackson  campaign,  Parton  quotes  an 
extract  from  the  paper  of  James  Gordon  Bennett.     I  reproduce  it: 

The  impotency  of  the  attacks  which  have  been  made  upon  General 
Jackson  during  the  last  three  years  by  the  Adams  party,  reminds  us  of  an 
anecdote:  "Mother,"  bawled  out  a  great  two-fisted  girl  one  day,  "my  toe 
itches!"    "Well,  scratch  it  then."    "I  have,  but  it  won't  stay  scratched!" 

"Mr.  Clay,  Mr.  Clay,"  cries  out  two-fisted  Uncle  Toby,  "Jackson's 
a-coming — Jackson's  a-coming!"  "Well,  then,"  says  Clay,  "anti-tariflf  him  in  the 
Journal."  "I  have,  but  he  won't  stay  anti-tariffed."  "Mr.  Clay,  Mr.  Clay," 
bawls  out  Alderman  Binns,  "the  old  farmer  is  a-coming,  a-coming."  "Well, 
then,"  says  Harry,  "cofifin-hand-bill  him."  "I  have,"  says  Binns,  "but  he  won't 
stay  cofifin-hand-billed."  "Mr.  Adams,  Mr.  Adams,"  says  John  H.  Pleasants, 
the  hero's  coming,  actually  coming."  "Well,  then,"  says  Mr.  Adams,  "Burr 
him  and  traitor  him."  "I  have,  but  he  won't  stay  Burred  or  traitored."  "Mr. 
Clay,  Mr.  Clay,"  says  Charles  Hammond,  "Jackson  is  coming."  "Well," 
says  Clay,  "prove  him  a  negro-trader."  "Mr.  Clay,  Mr.  Clay,"  bawls  out  the 
full  Adams  slandering  chorus,  "  we  have  called  Jackson  a  murderer,  a  traitor, 
an  ignoramus,  a  fool,  a  crook-back,  a  pretender,  and  so  forth;  but  he  won't 
stay  any  of  these  names."  "He  won't?"  says  Mr.  Clay;  "why,  then,  I  shan't  stay 
in  Washington,  that's  all." 

I  do  not  refer  to  the  previous  campaigns  with  any  thought  that 
this  dispute  can  be  settled  at  any  time,  but  merely  to  refresh  the  mem- 
ories of  those  who  may  not  have  recently  reviewed  that  portion  of  our 
political  history.  Future  events  will  determine  which  branch  of  the 
party  adheres  to  the  principles  of  the  fathers  and  to  the  traditions  of  the 
party.  Future  events  must  also  determine  which  branch  of  the 
party  most  deserves  to  enjoy  public  confidence.  We  may  rest  assured 
that  victory  will  unltimately  come  to  those  who  propose  policies  most 
conducive  to  the  general  welfare.  The  only  criticism  which  I  desire  to 
record  here  is  that  the  gold  Democrats  sought  to  use  the  party  name 
for  purposes  of  deception.  The  party  name  belongs  to  the  majority 
of  the  party  and  the  minority  cannot  fairly,  honestly  or  honorably  use 
that  name  in  such  a  way  as  to  mislead  the  voters.  I  have  at  all  times 
defended  the  sovereign  right  of  the  citizen  to  follow  his  conscience 
and  his  judgment  in  political  matters,  and  to  make  his  party  affiliations 
conform  to  his  convictions,  but  a  fraud  attempted  against  the  voters 
is  no  more  defensible  than  a  fraud  attempted  in  a  business  transaction. 
Had  the  Indianapolis  convention  endorsed  the  Republican  ticket  we 
might  have  found  fault  with  the  views  of  the  gold  Democrats,  but 


THE  BOLTING  DEMOCRATS.  391 

their  methods  would  not  have  been  open  to  attack.  To  nominate 
a  ticket,  however,  without  the  intention  of  voting  for  it,  and  to  hold 
public  meetings  for  the  ostensible  purpose  of  aiding  the  ticket,  but 
for  the  secret  purpose  of  aiding  a  ticket  which  was  not  openly  ad- 
vocated, introduces  into  national  affairs  a  new  kind  of  warfare  which, 
in  my  judgment,  history  must  condemn. 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 


LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE  OF  REPUBLICAN  CANDIDATES. 

N  the  20th  day  of  August  Mr.  McKinley  gave  to  the  pub- 
lic his  formal  letter  of  acceptance.  Below  will  be  found  that 
portion  of  it  which  refers  to  the  money  question. 


O 


Mr.  McKinley^s  Letter  of  Acceptance. 

Canton,  Ohio,  August  26,  1896. 

Hon.  John  M.  Thurston,  and  others.  Members  of  the  Notification 
Committee  of  the  Republican  National  Convention:  Gentlemen. — In 
pursuance  of  the  promise  made  to  your  committee,  when  notified 
of  my  nomination  as  the  Republican  candidate  for  President,  I  beg  to 
consider  in  detail  questions  at  issue  in  the  pending  campaign.       *      *      ♦ 

For  the  first  time  since  1868,  if  ever  before,  there  is  presented  to  the 
American  people  this  year  a  clear  and  direct  issue  as  to  our  monetary  sys- 
tem, of  vast  importance  in  its  effects,  and  upon  the  right  settlement  of  which 
rests  largely  the  financial  honor  and  prosperity  of  the  country.  It  is  pro- 
posed by  one  wing  of  the  Democratic  party,  and  its  allies,  the  People's 
and  Silver  parties,  to  inaugurate  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  by 
independent  action  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  at  a  ratio  of  sixteen  ounces 
of  silver  to  one  ounce  of  gold.  The  mere  declaration  of  this  purpose  is  a 
menace  to  our  financial  and  industrial  interests  and  has  already  created  uni- 
versal alarm.  It  involves  great  peril  to  the  credit  and  business  of  the  coun- 
try, a  peril  so  grave  that  conservative  men  everywhere  are  breaking  away 
from  their  old  party  associations  and  uniting  with  other  patriotic  citizens 
in  emphatic  protest  against  the  platform  of  the  Democratic  National  Con- 
vention as  an  assault  upon  the  faith  and  honor  of  the  Government  and  the 
welfare  of  the  people.  We  have  had  few  questions  in  the  lifetime  of  the  Re- 
public more  serious  than  the  one  which  is  thus  presented. 

The  character  of  the  money  which  shall  measure  our  values  and  ex- 
changes, and  settle  our  balances  with  one  another,  and  with  the  nations  of 
the  world,  is  of  such  primary  importance,  and  so  far-reaching  in  its. conse- 
quences, as  to  call  for  the  most  painstaking  investigation,  and,  in  the  end,  a 
sober  and  unprejudiced  judgment  at  the  polls.  We  must  not  be  misled  by 
phrases,  nor  deluded  by  false  theories.  Free  silver  would  not  mean  that 
silver  dollars  were  to  be  freely  had  without  cost  or  labor.  It  would  mean 
the  free  use  of  the  mints  of  the  United  States  for  the  few  who  are  owners 
of  silver  bullion,  but  would  make  silver  coin  no  freer  to  the  many  who  are 
engaged  in  other  enterprises.  It  would  not  make  labor  easier,  the  hours 
of  labor  shorter,  or  the  pay  better.  It  would  not  make  farming  less  laborious, 
or  more  profitable.  It  would  not  start  a  factory  or  make  a  demand  for  an 
additional   day's  labor.     It  would  create   no  new  occupations.     It  would  add 

392 


RBWBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE.  393 

nothing  to  the  comfort  of  the  masses,  the  capital  of  the  people,  or  the  wealth 
of  the  Nation.  It  seeks  to  introduce  a  new  measure  of  value,  but  would  add 
no  value  to  the  thing  measured.  It  would  not  conserve  values.  On  the  con- 
trary, it  would  derange  all  existing  values.  It  would  not  restore  business 
confidence,  but  its  direct  effect  would  be  to  destroy  the  little  which  yet 
remains. 

The  meaning  of  the  coinage  plank  adopted  at  Chicago  is  that  any  one 
may  take  a  quantity  of  silver  bullion  now  worth  fifty-three  cents  to  the 
mints  of  the  United  States,  have  it  coined  at  the  expense  of  the  Government, 
and  receive  for  it  a  silver  dollar,  which  shall  be  legal  tender  for  the  payment  of 
all  debts,  public  and  private.  The  owner  of  the  silver  bullion  would  get 
the  silver  dollar.  It  would  belong  to  him  and  to  nobody  else. 
Other  people  would  get  it  only  by  their  labor,  the  products  of  their  land, 
or  something  of  value.  The  bullion  owner  on  the  basis  of  present  values 
would  receive  the  silver  dollar  for  fifty-three  cents'  worth  of  silver,  and  other 
people  would  be  required  to  receive  it  as  a  full  dollar  in  the  payment  of  debts. 
The  Government  would  get  nothing  from  the  transaction.  It  would  bear  the 
expense  of  coining  the  silver  and  the  community  would  suffer  loss  by  its  use. 

We  have  coined  since  1878  more  than  four  hundred  millions  of  silver  dol- 
lars, which  are  maintained  by  the  Government  at  parity  with  gold,  and  are  a 
full  legal  tender  for  the  payment  of  all  debts,  public  and  private.  How  are 
the  silver  dollars  now  in  use  different  from  those  which  would  be  in  use 
under  free  coinage?  They  are  to  be  of  the  same  weight  and  fineness;  they 
are  to  bear  the  same  stamp  of  the  government.  Why  would  they  not  be 
of  the  same  value?  I  answer:  The  silver  dollars  now  in  use  were  coined  on 
account  of  the  Government,  and  not  for  private  account  or  gain,  and  the 
Government  Tias  solemnly  agreed  to  keep  them  as  good  as  the  best  dollars  we 
have.  The  Government  bought  the  silver  bullion  at  its  market  value  and 
coined  it  into  silver  dollars.  Having  exclusive  control  of  the  mintage,  it 
only  coins  what  it  can  hold  at  a  parity  with  gold.  The  profit,  representing 
the  difference  between  the  commercial  value  of  the  silver  bullion  and  the 
face  value  of  the  silver  dollar,  goes  to  the  Government  for  the  benefit  of 
the  people.  The  Government  bought  the  silver  bullion  contained  in  the  silver 
dollar  at  very  much  less  than  its  coinage  value.  It  paid  it  out  to  its  creditors, 
and  put  it  in  circulation  among  the  people  at  its  face  value  of  one  hundred 
cents,  or  a  full  dollar.  It  required  the  people  to  accept  it  as  a  legal  tender, 
and  is  thus  morally  bound  to  maintain  it  at  a  parity  with  gold,  which  was 
then,  as  now,  the  recognized  standard  with  us,  and  the  most  enlightened 
nations  of  the  world.  The  Government  having  issued  and  circulated  the  silver 
dollar,  it  must  in  honor  protect  the  holder  from  loss.  This  obligation  it  has 
so  far  sacredly  kept.  Not  only  is  there  a  moral  obligation,  but  there  is  a 
legal  obligation,  expressed  in  public  statute,  to  maintain  the  parity. 

These  dollars,  in  the  particulars  I  have  named,  are  not  the  same  as  the 
dollars  which  would  be  issued  under  free  coinage.  They  would  be  the  same 
in  form,  but  different  in  value.  The  Government  would  have  no  part  in  the 
transaction  except  to  coin  the  silver  bullion  into  dollars.  It  would  share  in  no 
part  of  the  profit.  It  would  take  upon  itself  no  obligation.  It  would  not 
put   the    dollars    into    circulation.      It   would    only    get   them,    as   any   citizen 


394  REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE. 

would  get  them,  by  giving  something  for  them.  It  would  deliver  them  to 
those  who  deposited  the  silver,  and  its  connection  with  the  transaction  there 
ends.  Such  are  the  silver  dollars  which  would  be  issued  under  free 
coinage  of  silver  at  a  ratio  of  sixteen  to  one.  Who  would  maintain  the 
parity?  What  would  keep  them  at  par  with  gold?  There  would  be  no  ob- 
ligation resting  upon  the  Government  to  do  it,  and  if  there  were,  it  would 
be  powerless  to  do  it.  The  simple  truth  is,  we  would  be  driven  to  a  silver 
basis — to  silver  monometallism.  These  dollars,  therefore,  would  stand  upon 
their  real  value.  If  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  at  a  ratio  of 
sixteen  ounces  of  silver  to  one  ounce  of  gold  would,  as  some  of  its  advocates 
assert,  make  fifty-three  cents  in  silver  worth  one  hundred  cents,  and  the 
silver  dollar  equal  to  the  gold  dollar,  then  we  would  have  no  cheaper  money 
than  now,  and  it  would  be  no  easier  to  get.  But  that  such  would  be  the 
result  is  against  reason  and  is  contradicted  by  experience  in  all  times  and 
in  all  lands.  It  means  the  debasement  of  our  currency  to  the  amount  of  the 
difference  between  the  commercial  and  coin  value  of  the  silver  dollar,  which 
is  ever  changing,  and  the  effect  would  be  to  reduce  property  values,  entail 
untold  financial  loss,  destroy  confidence,  impair  the  obligations  of  existing  con- 
tracts, further  impoverish  the  laborers  and  producers  of  the  country,  create 
a  panic  of  unparalleled  severity,  and  inflict  upon  trade  and  commerce  a 
deadly  blow.    Against  any  such  policy,  I  am  unalterably  opposed. 

Bimetallism  cannot  be  secured  by  independent  action  on  our  part.  It  can 
not  be  obtained  by  opening  our  mints  to  the  unlimited  coinage  of  the  silver 
of  the  world,  at  a  ratio  of  sixteen  ounces  of  silver  to  one  ounce  of  gold,  when 
the  commercial  ratio  is  more  than  thirty  ounces  of  silver  to  one  ounce  of  gold. 
Mexico  and  China  have  tried  the  experiment.  Mexico  has  free  coinage  of  silver 
and  gold  at  a  ratio  slightly  in  excess  of  sixteen  and  a  half  ounces  of  silver  to  one 
ounce  of  gold,  and  while  her  mints  are  freely  open  to  both  metals  at  that 
ratio,  not  a  single  dollar  in  gold  bullion  is  coined  and  circulated  as  money. 
Gold  has  been  driven  out  of  circulation  in  these  countries  and  they  are  on  a 
silver  basis  alone.  "Until  international  agreement  is  had,  it  is  the  plain 
duty  of  the  United  States  to  maintain  the  gold  standard.  It  is  the  recognized 
and  sole  standard  of  the  great  commercial  nations  of  the  world,  with  which 
we  trade  more  largely  than  any  other.  Eighty-four  per  cent,  of  our  foreign 
trade  for  the  fiscal  year  1895  was  with  gold  standard  countries,  and  our  trade 
with  other  countries  was  settled  on  a  gold  basis. 

Chiefly  by  means  of  legislation  during  and  since  1878  there  has  been  put  in 
circulation  more  than  $624,000,000  of  silver,  or  its  representative.  This  has 
been  done  in  the  honest  effort  to  give  to  silver,  if  possible,  the  same  bullion 
and  coinage  value,  and  encourage  the  concurrent  use  of  both  gold  and  silver 
as  money.  Prior  to  that  time  there  had  been  less  than  nine  millions  of  silver 
dollars  coined  in  the  entire  history  of  the  United  States,  a  period  of  eighty- 
nine  years.  This  legislation  secures  the  largest  use  of  silver  consistent  with 
financial  safety  and  the  pledge  to  maintain  its  parity  with  gold.  We  have 
today  more  silver  than  gold.  This  has  been  accomplished  at  times  with  grave 
peril  to  the  public  credit.  The  so-called  Sherman  law  sought  to  use  all  the 
silver  product  of  the  United  States  for  money  at  its  market  value.  From  i8go 
to    1893   the   Government   purchased   4,500,000   ounces    of   silver   a    month,    or 


REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE.  395 

54,000,000  ounces  a  year.  This  was  one-third  of  the  product  of  the  world  and 
practically  all  o*f  this  country's  product.  It  was  believed  by  those  who  then 
and  now  favor  free  coinage  that  such  use  of  silver  would  advance  its  bullion 
value  to  its  coinage  value,  but  this  expectation  was  not  realized.  In  a  few 
months,  notwithstanding  the  unprecedented  market  for  the  silver  produced  in 
the  United  States,  the  price  of  silver  went  down  very  rapidly,  reaching  a  lower 
point  than  ever  before.  Then,  upon  the  recommendation  of  President  Cleve- 
land, both  political  parties  united  in  the  repeal  of  the  purchasing  clause  of  the 
Sherman  law.  We  can  not  with  safety  engage  in  further  experiments  in  this 
direction. 

On  the  22d  of  August,  1891,  in  a  public  address,  I  said: 

If  we  could  have  an  international  ratio,  which  all  the  leading  nations  of  the  world 
would  adopt,  and  the  true  relation  be  fixed  between  the  two  metals,  and  all  agree  upon 
the  quantity  of  silver  which  should  constitute  a  dollar,  then  silver  would  be  as  free 
and  unlimited  in  its  privileges  of  coinage  as  gold  is  today.  But  that  we  have  not 
been  able  to  secure,  and  with  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  adopted  in  the 
United  States,  at  the  present  ratio,  we  would  be  still  further  removed  from  any  In- 
ternational agreement.  We  may  never  be  able  to  secure  It  if  we  enter  upon  the 
isolated  coinage  of  silver.  The  double  standard  implies  equality  at  a  ratio,  and  that 
equality  can  only  be  established  by  the  concurrent  law  of  nations.  It  was  the  con- 
current law  of  nations  that  made  the  double  standard;  it  will  require  the  concurrent 
law  of  nations  to  reinstate  and  sustain  it. 

The  Republican  party  has  not  been,  and  is  not  now,  opposed  to  the  use 
of  silver  money,  as  its  record  abundantly  shows.  It  has  done  all  that  could 
be  done  for  its  increased  use,  with  safety  and  honor,  by  the  United  States 
acting  apart  from  other  governments.  There  are  those  who  think  that  it 
has  already  gone  beyond  the  limit  of  financial  prudence.  Surely  we  can 
go  no  further,  and  we  must  not  permit  false  lights  to  lure  us  across  the 
danger  line.  • 

We  have  more  silver  in  use  than  any  other  country  in  the  world, 
except  India  or  China — $500,000,000  more  than  Great  Britain;  $150,000,000 
more  than  France;  $400,000,000  more  than  Germany;  $325,000,000  less  than 
India,  and  $125,000,000  less  than  China.  The  Republican  party  has  declared 
in  favor  of  an  international  agreement,  and  if  elected  President  it  will  be 
my  duty  to  employ  all  proper  means  to  promote  it.  The  free  coinage  of 
silver  in  this  country  would  defer,  if  not  defeat,  international  bimetallism,  and 
until  an  international  agreement  can  be  had  every  interest  requires  us  to 
maintain  our  present  standard.  Independent  free  coinage  of  silver  at  a  ratio 
of  sixteen  ounces  of  silver  to  one  ounce  of  gold  would  insure  the  speedy 
contraction  of  the  volume  of  our  currency.  It  would  drive  at  least  five 
hundred  millions  of  gold  dollars,  which  we  now  have,  permanently  from  the  trade 
of  the  country,  and  greatly  decrease  our  per  capita  circulation.  It  is  not  pro- 
posed by  the  Republican  party  to  take  from  the  circulating  medium  of  the 
country  any  of  the  silver  we  now  have.  On  the  contrary  it  is  proposed  to 
keep  all  of  the  silver  money  now  in  circulation  on  a  parity  with  gold  by 
maintaining  the  pledge  of  the  Government  that  all  of  it  shall  be  equal  to 
gold.  This  has  been  the  unbroken  policy  of  the  Republican  party  since 
1878.  It  has  inaugurated  no  new  policy.  It  will  keep  in  circulation  and  as 
good  as  gold  all  of  the  silver  and  paper  moneys  which  are  now  included 
in  the  currency  of  the  country.     It  will  maintain  their  parity.     It  will  pre- 


396  REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE. 

serve  their  equality  in  the  future  as  it  has  always  done  in  the  past.  It 
will  not  consent  to  put  this  country  on  a  silver  basis  which  would  inevitably 
follow  independent  free  coinage  at  a  ratio  of  sixteen  to  one.  It  will  oppose 
the  expulsion  of  gold  from  our  circulation. 

If  there  is  any  one  thing  which  should  be  free  from  speculation  and  fluc- 
tuation it  is  the  money  of  a  country.  It  ought  never  to  be  the  subject  of  mere 
partisan  contention.  When  we  part  with  our  labor,  our  products,  or  our 
property,  we  should  receive  in  return  money  which  is  as  stable  and  un- 
changing in  value  as  the  ingenuity  of  honest  men  can  make  it.  Debasement 
of  the  currency  means  destruction  of  values.  No  one  suffers  so  much  from 
cheap  money  as  the  farmers  and  laborers.  They  are  the  first  to  feel  its  bad 
eflFects  and  the  last  to  recover  from  them.  This  has  been  the  uniform 
experience  of  all  countries,  and  here,  as  elsewhere,  the  poor,  and  not  the  rich, 
are  always  the  greatest  sufferers  from  every  attempt  to  debase  our  money. 
It  would  fall  with  alarming  severity  upon  investments  already  made;  upon 
insurance  companies  and  their,  policy-holders;  upon  savings  banks  and  their 
depositors;  upon  building  and  loan  associations  and  their  members;  upon 
the  savings  of  thrift;  upon  pensioners  and  their  families;  and  upon  wage 
earners,  and  the  purchasing  power  of  their  wages. 

The  silver  question  is  not  the  only  issue  affecting  our  money  in  the 
pending  contest.  Not  content  with  urging  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  its 
strongest  champions  demand  that  our  paper  money  shall  be  issued  directly 
by  the  Government  of  the  United  States.  This  is  the  Chicago  Democratic 
declaration.  The  St.  Louis  People's  declaration  is  that  "  our  National  money 
shall  be  issued  by  the  general  Government  only,  without  the  intervention  of 
banks  of  issue,  be  full  legal  tender  for  the  payment  of  all  debts,  public  and 
private,"  and  be  distributed  "direct  to  the  people,  and  through  lawful  disburse- 
ments of  the  Government."  Thus  in  addition  to  the  free  coinage  of  the 
world's  silver  we  are  asked  to  enter  upon  an  era  of  unlimited  irredeemable 
paper  currency.  The  question  which  was  fought  out  from  1865  to  1879  is  thus 
to  be  reopened,  with  all  its  uncertainties,  and  cheap  money  experiments  of 
every  conceivable  form  foisted  upon  us.  This  indicates  a  most  startling  re- 
actionary policy,  strangely  at  variance  with  every  requirement  of  sound  finance; 
but  the  declaration  shows  the  spirit  and  purpose  of  those  who  by  combined 
action  are  contending  for  the  control  of  the  Government.  Not  satisfied  with 
the  debasement  of  our  coin  which  would  inevitably  follow  the  free  coinage  of 
silver  at  sixteen  to  one,  they  would  still  further  degrade  our  currency  and 
threaten  the  publiq  honor  by  the  unlimited  issue  of  an  irredeemable  paper 
currency.  A  graver  menace  to  our  financial  standing  and  credit  could  hardly 
be  conceived,  and  every  patriotic  citizen  should  be  aroused  to  promptly  meet 
and  effectually  defeat  it.      *      *      * 

What  a  startling  and  sudden  change  within  the  short  period  of  eight 
months,  from  December,  1892,  to  August,  1893!  What  had  occurred?  A  change 
of  administration;  all  branches  of  the  Government  had  been  entrusted  to  the 
Democratic  party,  which  was  committed  against  the  protective  policy  that 
had  prevailed  uninterruptedly  for  more  than  thirty-two  years  and  brought  un- 
exampled prosperity  to  the  country,  and  firmly  pledged  to  its  complete 
overthrow   and  the   subo.itution   of  a   tariff   for   revenue    only.      The    change 


REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE.  397 

having  been  decreed  by  the  elections  in  November,  its  effects  were  at  once 
anticipated  and  felt.  We  cannot  close  our  eyes  to  these  altered  conditions,  nor 
would  it  be  wise  to  exclude  from  contemplation  and  investigation  the  causes 
which  produce  them.  They  are  facts  which  we  cannot,  as  a  people,  disregard, 
and  vve  can  only  hope  to  improve  our  present  condition  by  a  study  of  their  causes. 
In  December,  1892,  we  had  the  same  currency  and  practically  the  same  volume 
of  currency  that  we  have  now.  It  aggregated  in  1892  $2,372,599,501;  in  1893, 
$2,323,000,000;  in  1894,  $2,323,442,362,  and  in  December,  1895,  $2,194,000,230. 
The  per  capita  of  money,  too,  has  been  practically  the  same  during  this 
whole  period.  The  quality  of  the  money  has  been  identical— all  kept  equal 
to  gold.  There  is  nothing  connected  with  our  money,  therefore,  to  account 
for  this  sudden  and  aggravated  industrial  change.  Whatever  is  tp  be  depre- 
cated in  our  financial  system,  it  must  everywhere  be  admitted  that  our  money 
has  been  absolutely  good  and  has  brought  neither  loss  nor  inconvenience  to  its 
holders.  A  depreciated  currency  has  not  existed  to  further  vex  the  troubled 
business  situation. 

It  is  a  mere  pretense  to  attribute  the  hard  times  to  the  fact  that  all  our 
currency  is  on  a  gold  basis.  Good  money  never  made  times  hard.  Those 
who  assert  that  our  present  industrial  and  financial  depression  is  the  re- 
sult of  the  gold  standard  have  not  read  American  history  aright,  or  been 
careful  students  of  the  events  of  recent  years.  We  never  had  greater  pros- 
perity in  this  country,  in  every  field  of  employment  and  industry,  than  in 
the  busy  years  from  1880  to  1892,  during  all  of  which  time  this  country  was  on  a 
gold  basis  and  employed  more  gold  money  in  its  fiscal  and  business  oper- 
ations than  ever  before.  *  *  *  L^t  ^s  hold  fast  to  that  which  we  know 
is  good.  It  is  not  more  money  we  want;  what  we  want  is  to  put  the 
money  we  already  have  at  work.  *  *  *  When  those  who  have  money 
lack  confidence  in  the  stability  of  values  and  investments  they  will  not 
part  with  their  money.  Business  is  stagnated — the  life-blood  of  trade  is 
checked  and  congested.  We  cannot  restore  public  confidence  by  an  act  which 
would  revolutionize  all  values,  or  an  act  which  entails  a  deficiency  in  the 
public  revenues.  We  cannot  inspire  confidence  by  advocating  repudiation  or 
practicing  dishonesty.       *      *      * 

It  is  not  an  increase  in  the  volume  of  money  which  is  the  need  of  the 
time,  but  an  increase  in  the  volume  of  business.  Not  an  increase  of  coin,  but 
an  increase  of  confidence.  Not  more  coinage,  but  a  more  active  use  of  the 
money  coined.  Not  open  mints  for  the  unlimited  coinage  of  the  silver  of 
the  world,  but  open  mills  for  the  full  and  unrestricted  labor  of  American 
workingmen.  The  employment  of  our  mints  for  the  coinage  of  the  silver 
of  the  world  would  not  bring  the  necessaries  and  comforts  of  life  back  to  our 
people. 

This  was  followed,  shortly  afterwards,  by  Mr.  Hobart's  letter  of 
acceptance,  which  is  also  reproduced  in  so  far  as  it  treats  of  the> finan- 
cial issue. 


398  REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE. 

Mr.  Hobart's  Letter  of  Acceptance* 

Paterson,  N.  J.,  September  lo,  1896. 
Hon.  Charles  W.  Fairbanks  and  Others  of  the  Notification  Committee  of  the 
Republican  National  Convention: 

Gentlemen:  I  have  already,  in  accepting  the  nomination  for  the  office  of 
the  Vice-Presidency  tendered  me  by  the  National  Republican  Convention,  ex- 
pressed my  approval  of  the  platform  adopted  by  that  body  as  the  party  basis 
of  doctrine.  In  accordance  with  accepted  usage  I  beg  now  to  supplement 
that  brief  statement  of  my  views,  by  some  additional  reflections  upon  the  ques- 
tions which  are  in  debate  before  the  American  people. 

The  platform  declarations  in  reference  to  the  money  question  express  clearly 
and  unmistakably  the  attitude  of  the  Republican  party  as  to  this  supremely 
important  subject.  We  stand  unqualifiedly  for  honesty  in  finance,  and  the 
permanent  adjustment  of  our  monetary  system,  in  the  multifarious  activities  of 
trade  and  commerce,  to  the  existing  gold  standard  of  value.  We  hold  that 
every  dollar  of  currency  issued  by  the  United  States,  whether  of  gold,  silver  or 
paper,  must  be  worth  a  dollar  in  gold,  whether  in  the  pocket  of  the  man  who 
toils  for  his  daily  bread,  in  the  vault  of  the  savings  bank  which  holds  his 
deposits,  or  in  the  exchanges  of  the  world. 

The  money  standard  of  a  great  nation  should  be  as  fixed  and  permanent  as 
the  nation  itself.  To  secure  and  retain  the  best  should  be  the  desire  of  every 
right  minded  citizen.  Resting  on  stable  foundations,  continuous  and  unvarying 
certainty  of  value  should  be  its  distinguishing  characteristic.  The  experience  of 
all  history  confirms  the  truth  that  every  coin,  made  under  any  law,  howsoever 
that  coin  may  be  stamped,  will  finally  command  in  the  markets  of  the  world 
the  exact  value  of  the  materials  which  compose  it.  The  dollar  of  our  country, 
whether  of  gold  or  silver,  should  be  of  the  full  value  of  one  hundred  cents, 
and  by  so  much  as  any  dollar  is  worth  less  than  this  in  the  market,  by  precisely 
that  sum  will  some  one  be  defrauded. 

The  necessity  of  a  certain  and  fixed  money  value  between  nations  as  well 
as  individuals  has  grown  out  of  the  interchange  of  commodities,  the  trade  and 
business  relationships  which  have  arisen  among  the  peoples  of  the  world,  with 
the  enlargement  of  human  wants  and  the  broadening  of  human  interests.  This 
necessity  has  made  gold  the  final  standard  of  all  enlightened  nations.  Other 
metals,  including  silver,  have  a  recognized  commercial  value,  and  silver,  espe- 
cially, has  a  value  of  great  importance  for  subsidiary  coinage.  In  view  of  a  sed- 
ulous effort  by  the  advocates  of  free  coinage  to  create  a  contrary  impression,  it 
cannot  be  too  strongly  emphasized  that  the  Republican  party  in  its  platform 
affirms  this  value  in  silver,  and  favors  the  largest  possible  use  of  that  metal  as 
actual  money  that  can  be  maintained  with  safety.  Not  only  this,  it  will  not  an- 
tagonize, but  will  gladly  assist  in  promoting  a  double  standard,  whenever  it  can 
be  secured  by  agreement  and  co-operation  among  the  nations.  The  bimetallic 
currency,  involving  the  free  use  of  silver,  which  we  now  have,  is  cordially 
approved  by  Republicans.  Bu{  a  standard  and  a  currency  are  vastly  different 
things. 

If  we  are  to  continue  to  hold  our  place  among  the  great  commercial  nations, 
we  must  cease  juggling  with  this  question  and  make  our  honesty  of  purpose 


f  ^' 


REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE.  401 

clear  to  the  world.  No  room  should  be  left  for  misconception  as  to  the  mean- 
ing of  the  language  used  in  the  bonds  of  the  Government  not  yet  matured.  It 
should  not  be  possible  for  any  party  or  individual  to  raise  a  question  as  to  the 
poirpose  of  the  country  to  pay  all  its  obligations  in  the  best  form  of  money  rec- 
ognized by  the  commercial  world.  Any  nation  which  is  worthy  of  credit  or 
confidence  can  afford  to  say  explicitly,  on  a  question  so  vital  to  every  interest, 
what  it  means,  when  such  meaning  is  challenged  or  doubted.  It  is  desirable 
that  we  should  make  it  known  at  once  and  authoritatively,  that  an  "honest 
dollar"  means  any  dollar  equivalent  to  a  gold  dollar  of  the  present  standard  of 
weight  and  fineness.  The  world  should  likewise  be  assured  that  the  standard 
dollar  of  America  is  as  inflexible  a  quantity  as  the  French  Napoleon,  the 
British  sovereign,  or  the  German  twenty  mark  piece. 

The  free  coinage  of  silver  at  the  ratio  of  16  to  i  is  a  policy  which  no 
nation  has  ever  before  proposed,  and  it  is  not  today  permitted  in  any  mint 
in  the  world — not  even  in  Mexico.  It  is  purposed  to  make  the  coinage  un- 
limited, at  an  absolutely  fictitious  ratio,  fixed  with  no  reference  to  intrinsic  value 
or  pledge  of  ultimate  redemption.  With  silver  at  its  present  price  of  less  than 
seventy  cents  per  ounce  in  the  market,  such  a  policy  means  an  immediate  profit 
to  the  seller  of  silver  for  which  there  is  no  return  now  or  hereafter  to  the 
people  or  the  Government.  It  means  that,  for  each  dollar's  worth  of  silver 
bullion  delivered  at  the  mint,  practically  two  dollars  of  stamped  coin  will 
be  given  in  exchange.  For  one  hundred  dollars'  worth  of  bullion  nearly  two 
hundred  silver  dollars  will  be  delivered. 

Let  it  also  be  remembered  that  such  an  act  would  probably  be  culminative 
in  its  effects.  The  crop  of  silver,  unlike  that  of  hay,  or  wheat,  or  corn — which 
being  of  yearly  production  can  be  regulated  by  the  law  of  demand  and  supply — 
is  fixed  once  for  all.  The  silver  which  has  not  yet  been  gathered  is  all  in  the 
ground.  Dearth  or  other  accident  of  the  elements  cannot  augment  or  diminish 
it.  Is  it  not  more  than  probable  that  with  the  enormous  premium  offered  for  its 
mining  the  cupidity  of  man  would  make  an  over-supply  continuous,  with  the 
necessary  result  of  a  steady  depreciation  as  _  long  as  the  silver  dollar  could  be 
kept  in  circulation  at  all?  Under  the  laws  of  finance,  which  are  as  fixed  as 
those  of  any  other  science,  the  inevitable  result  would  finally  be  a  currency  all 
and  absolutely  fiat.  There  is  no  difference  in  principle  between  a  dollar  half  fiat 
and  one  all  fiat.  The  latter,  as  the  cheapest,  under  the  logic  of  "cheap  money," 
would  surely  drive  the  other  out. 

Any  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Government  to  create,  by  its  fiat,  money 
of  a  fictitious  value,  would  dishonor  us  in  the  eyes  of  other  peoples,  and  bring 
infinite  reproach  upon  the  national  character.  The  business  and  financial  conse- 
quences of  such  an  immoral  act  would  be  world  wide,  because  our  commercial 
relations  are  world  wide.  All  our  settlements  with  other  lands  must  be  made, 
not  with  the  money  which  may  be  legally  current  in  our  own  country,  but  in 
gold,  the  standard  of  all  nations  with  which  our  relations  are  most  cordial  and 
extensive,  and  no  legislative  enactment  can  free  us  from  that  inevitable  necessity. 
It  is  a  known  fact  that  more  than  eighty  per  cent,  of  the  commerce  of  the 
world  is  settled  in  gold  or  on  a  gold  basis. 

Such  free  coinage  legislation,  if  ever  consummated,  would  discriminate 
28 


402  REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE. 

against  every  producer  of  wheat,  cotton,  corn  or  rye — who  should  in  justice 
be  equally  entitled,  with  the  silver  owner,  to  sell  his  products  to  the  United 
States  Treasury,  at  a  profit  fixed  by  the  Government — and  against  all  producers 
of  iron,  steel,  zinc  or  copper,  who  might  properly  claim  to  have  their  metals 
made  into  current  coin.  It  would,  as  well,  be  a  fraud  upon  all  persons  forced 
to  accept  a  currency  thus  stimulated,  and  at  the  same  time  degraded. 

In  every  aspect  the  proposed  policy  is  partial  and  one  sided,  because  it  is 
only  when  a  profit  can  be  made  by  a  mine  owner  or  dealer  that  he  takes  his 
silver  to  the  mint  for  coinage.  The  Government  is  always  at  the  losing  end. 
Stamp  such  fictitious  value  upon  silver  ore,  and  a  dishonest  and  unjust  dis- 
crimination will  be  made  against  every  other  form  of  industry.  When  silver 
bullion,  worth  a  little  more  than  fifty  cents,  is  made  into  a  legal  tender  dollar, 
driving  out  one  having  a  purchasing  and  debt  paying  power  of  one  hundred 
cents,  it  will  clearly  be  done  at  the  expense  and  injury  of  every  class  of  the 
community. 

Those  who  contend  for  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  may  believe 
in  all  honesty  that  while  the  present  ratio  of  silver  to  gold  is  as  thirty  to  one 
(not  sixteen  to  one),  silver  will  rise  above  the  existing  market  value.  If  it 
does  so  rise  the  effect  will  be  to  make  the  loss  to  all  the  people  so  much  less, 
but  such  an  opinion  is  but  a  hazardous  conjecture  at  best,  and  is  not  justi- 
fied by  experience.  Within  the  last  twenty  years  this  Government  has  bought 
about  460  millions  of  ounces  of  silver,  from  which  it  has  coined  approximately 
430  millions  of  silver  dollars  and  issued  130  millions  of  dollars  in  silver  cer- 
tificates, and  the  price  of  the  metal  has  steadily  declined  from  $1.15  per  ounce  to 
68  cents  per  ounce.  What  will  be  the  decline  when  the  supply  is  augmented 
by  the  offerings  of  all  the  world?  The  loss  upon  these  silver  purchases  to 
the  people  of  this  country  has  now  been  nearly  150  millions  of  dollars. 

The  dolbr  of  our  fathers,  about  which  so  much  is  said,  was  an  honest  dollar, 
silver  maintaining  a  full  parity  of  intrinsic  value  with  gold.  The  fathers  would 
have  spurned  and  ridiculed  a  proposition  to  make  a  silver  dollar  worth  only 
fifty-three  cents  stand  of  equal  value  with  a  gold  one  worth  a  hundred  cents. 
The  experience  of  all  nations  proves  that  any  depreciation,  however  slight,  of 
another  standard,  from  the  parity  with  gold,  has  driven  the  more  valuable  one 
out  of  circulation,  and  such'  experience  in  a  matter  of  this  kind  is  worth  much 
more  than  mere  interested  speculative  opinion.  The  fact  that  few  gold  coins 
are  seen  in  ordinary  circulation  for  domestic  uses  is  no  proof  at  all  that  the 
metal  is  not  performing  a  most  important  function  in  business  affairs.  The 
foundation  of  the  house  is  not  always  in  sight,  but  the  house  would  not  stand 
an  hour  if  there  was  no  foundation.  The  great  enginery  that  moves  the 
ocean  steamship  is  not  always  in  view  of  the  passenger,  but  it  is,  all  the  same, 
the  propelling  force  of  the  vessel,  without  which  it  would  soon  become  a 
worthless  derelict. 

It  may  be  instructive  to  consider  a  moment  how  the  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  silver  would  affect  a  few  great  interests,  and  I  mention  only  enough 
to  demonstrate  what  a  calamity  may  lie  before  us  if  the  platform  formulated  at 
Chicago  is  permitted  to  be  carried  out. 

There  are  now  on  deposit  in  the  savings  banks  of  thirty-three  States  and 
Territories  of  this  Union   the  vast  sum  of  $2,000,000,000.    These  are  the  savings 


REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE.  403 

of  almost  5,000,000  depositors.  In  many  cases  they  represent  the  labor  and 
economies  of  years.  Any  depreciation  in  the  value  of  the  dollar  would  defraud 
every  man,  woman  and  child  to  whom  these  savings  belong.  £very  dollar 
of  their  earnings  when  deposited  was  worth  one  hundred  cents  in  gold  of 
the  present  standard  of  weight  and  fineness.  Are  they  not  entitled  to 
receive  in  full,  with  interest,  all  they  have  so  deposited?  Any  legislation 
that  would  reduce  it  by  the  value  of  a  single  dime  would  be  an  intolerable 
wrong  to  each  depositor.  Every  bank  or  banker  who  has  accepted  the  earn- 
ings of  these  millions  of  dollars  to  the  credit  of  our  citizens  must  be  required 
to  pay  them  back  in  money  not  one  whit  less  valuable  than  that  which  these 
banks  and  bankers  received  in  trust. 

There  are,  in  this  country,  nearly  six  thousand  building  and  loan  associa- 
tions, with  shareholders  to  the  number  of  1,800,000,  and  with  assets  amount- 
ing to  more  than  $500,000,000.  Their  average  of  holdings  is  nearly  $300  per 
capita,  and  in  many  cases  they  represent  the  savings  of  men  and  women  who 
have  denied  themselves  the  comforts  of  life  in  the  hope  of  being  able  to 
accumulate  enough  to  buy  or  build  homes  of  their  own.  They  have  aided  in 
the  erection  of  over  a  million  of  houses,  which  are  now  afifording  comfort  and 
shelter  for  five  millions  of  our  thrifty  people. 

Free  coinage  at  the  arbitrary  rate  of  sixteen  ounces  of  silver  to  one  of 
gold  would  be  equivalent  to  the  confiscation  of  nearly  half  the  savings  that  these 
people  have  invested.  It  would  be  tantamount  to  a  war  upon  American 
home-makers.  It  would  be  an  invasion  of  "the  homes  of  the  provident," 
and  tend  directly  to  "destroy  the  stimulus  to  endeavor  and  the  compensa- 
tion of  honest  toil."  Every  one  of  the  shareholders  of  these  associations 
is  entitled  to  be  repaid  in  money  of  the  same  value  which  he  deposited  by 
weekly  payments  or  otherwise  in  these  companies.  No  one  of  them  should  be 
made  homeless  because  a  political  party  demands  a  change  in  the  money 
standard  of  our  country,  as  an  experiment,  or  as  a  concession  to  selfishness  or 
greed. 

The  magnitude  of  the  disaster  which  would  overtake  these  and  cognate 
interests  becomes  the  more  strikingly  apparent  when  considered  in  the  aggre- 
gate. Stated  broadly,  the  savings  banks,  life  insurance  and  assessment  com- 
panies, and  building  loan  associations  of  the  country  hold  in  trust  $15,309,717,381. 
The  debasement  of  the  currency  to  a  silver  basis,  as  proposed  by  the  Chicago 
platform,  would  wipe  out  at  one  blow,  approximately  $7,963,504,856  of  this 
aggregate.  According  to  the  report  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  the 
total  value  of  the  main  cereal  crops  in  this  country  in  1894  was  $995,438,107. 
So  that  the  total  sum  belonging  to  the  people,  and  held  in  trust  in  these 
institutions,  which  would  be  obliterated  by  the  triumph  of  free  and  unlimited 
silver  coinage,  would  be  seven  and  one-half  times  the  total  value  of  the  annual 
cereal  crop  of  the  United  States.  The  total  value  of  the  manufactured  products 
of  the  country  for  the  census  year  of  1890  was  $9,372,537,283.  The  establishment 
of  a  silver  basis  of  value,  as  now  proposed,  would  entail  a  loss  to  these  three 
interests  alone  equal  to  eighty-five  per  cent,  of  this  enormous  output  of  all 
the  manufacturing  industries  of  the  Union,  and  would  affect  directly  nearly  one- 
third  of  its  whole  population. 

One  hundred  and  forty  millions  of  dollars  per  annum  are  due  to  pensioners 


404  REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE. 

of  the  late  war.  That  sum  represents  blood  spilled  and  sufferings  endured 
in  order  to  preserve  this  nation  from  disintegration.  In  many  cases,  the  sums 
so  paid  in  pensions  are  exceedingly  small;  in  few,  if  any,  are  they  excessive. 
The  spirit  that  would  deplete  these  to  the  extent  of  a  farthing  is  the  same 
that  would  organize  sedition,  destroy  the  peace  and  security  of  the  country, 
punish,  rather  than  reward,  our  veteran  soldiers,  and  is  unworthy  of  the 
countenance,  by  thought  or  vote,  of  any  patriotic  citizen  of  whatever 
political  faith.  No  party,  until  that  which  met  in  convention  at  Chicago,  has 
ever  ventured  to  insult  the  honored  survivors  of  our  struggle  for  the  national 
life  by  proposing  to  scale  their  pensions  horizontally,  and  to  pay  them  here- 
after in  depreciated  dollars  worth  only  fifty-three  cents  each. 

The  amounts  due,  in  addition  to  the  interests  already  named,  to  depositors 
and  trust  companies  in  national,  State  and  private  banks,  to  holders  of  fire  and 
accident  insurance  policies,  to  holders  of  industrial  insurance,  where  the 
money  deposited  or  the  premiums  have  been  paid  in  gold  or  its  equivalent, 
are  so  enormous,  together  with  the  sums  due,  and  to  become  due,  for  State, 
municipal,  county,  or  other  corporate  debts,  that  if  paid  in  depreciated  silver 
or  its  equivalent,  it  would  not  only  entail  upon  our  fellow  countrymen  a  loss 
in  money  which  has  not  been  equaled  in  a  similar  experience  since  the  world 
began,  but  it  would,  at  the  same  time,  bring  a  disgrace  to  our  country  such  as 
has  never  befallen  any  other  nation  which  had  the  ability  to  pay  its  honest 
debts.  In  our  condition  and  considering  our  magnificent  capacity  for  raising 
revenue,  such  wholesale  repudiation  is  without  necessity  or  excuse.  No 
political  expediency  or  party  exigency,  however  pressing,  could  justify  so 
monstrous  an  act. 

All  these  deposits  and  debts  must,  under  the  platform  of  the  Republican 
party,  be  met  and  adjusted  in  the  best  currency  the  world  knows,  and 
measured  by  the  same  standard  in  which  the  debts  have  been  contracted  or  the 
deposits  or  payments  have  been  made. 

Still  dealing  sparingly  with  figures,  of  which  there  is  an  enormous  mass 
to  sustain  the  position  of  the  advocates  of  the  gold  standard  of  value,  I  cite  one 
more  fact,  which  is  officially  established,  premised  by  the  truism  that  there 
is  no  better  test  of  the  growth  of  a  country's  prosperity  than  its  increase  in  the 
per  capita  holdings  of  its  population.  In  the  decade  between  1880  and  1890, 
during  which  we  had  our  existing  gold  standard,  and  were  under  the  condi- 
tions that  supervened  from  the  act  of  1873,  the  per  capita  ownings  of  this 
country  increased  from  $870  to  $1,036.  In  those  ten  years  the  aggregate  in- 
crease of  the  wealth  of  our  country  was  $21,395,000,000,  being  fifty  per  cent,  in 
excess  of  the  increase  for  any  previous  ten  years  since  1850,  and  at  the  amazing 
rate  of  over  two  thousand  millions  of  dollars  a  year.  The  framers  of  the 
Chicago  platform  in  the  face  of  this  fact,  and  of  the  enormous  increase  over 
Great  Britain,  during  this  same  gold  standard  decade,  of  our  country's  foreign 
trade  and  its  production  of  iron,  coal  and  other  great  symbols  of  national 
strength  and  progress,  assert  that  our  monetary  standard  is  "not  only  un- 
American  but  anti-American,"  and  that  it  has  brought  us  "into  financial  servi- 
tude to  London."  It  is  impossible  to  imagine  an  assertion  more  reckless  and 
indefensible. 

The  proposition  for  free  and  unlimited  silver  coinage,  carried  to  its  logical 


REPUBLICAN  LETTERS  OF  ACCEPTANCE.  405 

conclusion,  and  but  one  is  possible,  means,  as  before  intimated,  legislative  war- 
rant for  the  repudiation  of  all  existing  indebtedness,  public  and  private,  to  the 
extent  of  nearly  fifty  per  cent,  of  the  face  of  all  such  indebtedness.  It  demands 
an  unlimited  volume  of  fiat  currency,  irredeemable,  and  therefore  without  any 
standard  value  in  the  markets  of  the  world.  Every  consideration  of  public 
interest  and  public  honor  demands  that  this  proposition  should  be  rejected  by 
the  American  people. 

This  country  cannot  afford  to  give  its  sanction  to  wholesale  spoliation.  It 
must  hold  fast  to  its  integrity.  It  must  still  encourage  thrift  in  all  proper  ways. 
It  must  not  only  educate  its  children  to  honor  and  respect  the  flag,  but  it  should 
inculcate  fidelity  to  the  obligations  of  personal  and  national  honor  as  well. 
Both  these  great  principles  should  hereafter  be  taught  in  the  common  schools 
of  the  land,  and  the  lesson  impressed  upon  those  who  are  the  voters  of  today 
and  those  who  are  to  become  the  inheritors  of  sovereign  power  in  this  Republic, 
that  it  is  neither  wise,  patriotic,  nor  safe,  to  make  political  platforms  the 
mediums  of  assault  upon  property,  the  peace  of  society,  and  upon  civilization 
itself. 

Until  these  lessons  have  been  learned  by  our  children,  and  by  those  who 
have  reached  the  voting  age,  it  can  only  be  surmised  what  enlightened  statesmen 
and  political  economists  will  record,  as  to  the  action  of  a  party  convention 
which  offers  an  inducement  to  national  dishonesty  by  a  premium  of  forty-seven 
cents  for  every  fifty-three  cents'  worth  of  silver  that  can  be  extracted  from  the 
bowels  of  the  whole  earth,  with  a  cordial  invitation  to  all  to  produce  it  at  our 
mints  and  accept  for  it  a  full  silver  legal  tender  dollar  of  one  hundred  cents 
rated  value,  to  be  coined  free  of  charge  and  unlimited  in  quantity  for  private 
account. 

But  vastly  more  than  a  mere  assertion  of  a  purpose  to  reconstruct  the 
national  currency  is  suggested  by  the  Chicago  platform.  It  assumes,  in  fact, 
the  form  of  a  revolutionary  propaganda.  It  embodies  a  menace  of  national  dis- 
integration and  destruction.  This  spirit  manifested  itself  in  a  deliberate  propo- 
sition to  repudiate  the  plighted  public  faith,  to  impair  the  sanctity  of  the  obliga- 
tion of  private  contracts,  to  cripple  the  credit  of  the  nation  by  stripping  the 
Government  of  the  power  to  borrow  money  as  the  urgent  exigencies  of  the 
Treasury  may  require,  and,  in  a  word,  to  overthrow  all  the  foundations  of 
financial  and   industrial   stability.     ***** 

I  give,  in  another  chapter,  the  Republican  money  plank,  and  here 
present  the  interpretation  placed  upon  it  by  the  Presidential  and  Vice- 
Presidential  candidates  in  order  to  show  the  position  taken  by  the 
opposition  during  the  campaign.  The  portion  of  the  letter  most 
quoted  was  the  declaration  that  the  mills  should  be  opened  instead  of 
the  mints.  This  was  an  epigrammatic  sentence  and  did  considerable 
service  in  turning  public  attention  from  the  money  question  to  the 
tariflf  question.  The  country  was  flooded  with  large  posters  illus- 
trating this  sentiment. 


CHAPTER   XXVIII. 


1 


DEMOCRATIC   PLATFORM. 

GIVE  below  the  Democratic  national  platform,  adopted  at  Chicago 
on  the  9th  day  of  July,  1896,  together  with  my  letter  of  September 
9th,  accepting  the  Democratic  nomination. 


Democratic  Platform. 

We,  the  Democrats  of  the  United  States  in  Nalional  Convention  assem- 
bled, do  reaffirm  our  allegiance  to  those  great  essential  principles  of  justice 
and  liberty,  upon  which  our  institutions  are  founded,  and  which  the  Democratic 
party  has  advocated  from  Jefferson's  time  to  our  own — freedom  of  speech,  free- 
dom of  the  press,  freedom  of  conscience,  the  preservation  of  personal  rights, 
the  equality  of  all  citizens  before  the  law,  and  the  faithful  observance  of 
constitutional  limitations. 

During  all  these  years  the  Democratic  party  has  resisted  the  tendency  of 
selfish  interests  to  the  centralization  of  governmental  power,  and  steadfastly 
maintained  the  integrity  of  the  dual  scheme  of  government  established  by  the 
founders  of  this  Republic  of  republics.  Under  its  guidings  and  teachings  the 
great  principle  of  local  self-government  has  found  its  best  expression  in  the 
maintenance  of  the  rights  of  the  States  and  in  its  assertion  of  the  necessity  of 
confining  the  General  Government  to  the  exercise  of  the  powers  granted  by  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  guarantees  to  every  citizen  the  rights 
of  civil  and  religious  liberty.  The  Democratic  party  has  always  been  the 
exponent  of  political  liberty  and  religious  freedom,  and  it  renews  its  obligations 
and  reaffirms  its  devotions  to  these  fundamental  principles  of  the  Constitution. 

The  Money  Plank. 

Recognizing  that  the  money  question  is  paramount  to  all  others  at  this 
time,  we  invite  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Federal  C'onstitution  named  silver 
and  gold  together  as  the  money  metals  of  the  United  States,  and  that  the  first 
coinage  law  passed  by  Congress  under  the  Constitution  made  the  silver  dollar 
the  monetary  unit  and  admitted  gold  to  free  coinage  at  a  ratio  based  upon  the 
silver-dollar  unit. 

We  declare  that  the  act  of  1873  demonetizing  silver  without  the  knowledge 
or  approval  of  the  American  people  has  resulted  in  the  appreciation  of  gold 
and  a  corresponding  fall  in  the  prices  of  commodities  produced  by  the  people; 
a  heavy  increase  in  the  burden  of  taxation  and  of  all  debts,  public  and  private; 
the  enrichment  of  the  money-lending  class  at  home  and  abroad;  the  prostration 
of  industry  and  impoverishment  of  the  people. 

We  are  unalterably  opposed  to  monometallism  which  has  locked  fast  the 

406 


DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM.  407 

prosperity  of  an  industrial  people  in  the  paralysis  of  hard  times.  Gold  mono- 
metallism is  a  British  policy,  and  its  adoption  has  brought  other  nations  into 
financial  servitude  to  London.  It  is  not  only  un-American,  but  anti-American, 
and  it  can  be  fastened  on  the  United  States  only  by  the  stifling  of  that  spirit 
and  love  of  liberty  which  proclaimed  our  political  independence  in  1776  and 
won  it  in  the  war  of  the  Revolution. 

Wc  demand  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  both  silver  and  gold  at  the 
present  legal  ratio  of  16  to  i  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any 
other  nation.  We  demand  that  the  standard  silver  dollar  shall  be  a  full  legal 
tender,  equally  with  gold,  for  all  debts,  public  and  private,  and  we  favor  such 
legislation  as  will  prevent  for  the  future  the  demonetization  of  any  kind  of 
legal-tender  money  by  private  contract. 

We  are  opposed  to  the  policy  and  practice  of  surrendering  to  the  holders 
of  the  obligations  of  the  United  States  the  option  reserved  by  law  to  th»  Gov- 
ernment of  redeeming  such  obligations  in  either  silver  coin  or  gold  coin. 

We  are  opposed  to  the  issuing  of  interest-bearing  bonds  of  the  United 
States  in  time  of  peace  and  condemn  the  trafficking  with  banking  syndicates, 
which,  in  exchange  for  bonds  and  at  an  enormous  profit  to  themselves,  supply 
the  Federal  Treasury  with  gold  to  maintain  the  policy  of  gold  monometallism. 

Congress  alone  has  the  power  to  coin  and  issue  money,  and  President 
Jackson  declared  that  this  power  could  not  be  delegated  to  corporations  or 
individuals.  We  therefore  denounce  the  issuance  of  notes  intended  to  cir- 
culate as  money  by  National  banks  as  in  derogation  of  the  Constitution,  and 
we  demand  that  all  paper  which  is  made  a  legal  tender  for  public  and  private 
debts,  or  which  is  receivable  for  dues  to  the  United  States,  shall  be  issued  by 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  and  shall  be  redeemable  in  coin. 

We  hold  that  tariff  duties  should  be  levied  for  purposes  of  revenue,  such 
duties  to  be  so  adjusted  as  to  operate  equally  throughout  the  country,  and  not 
discriminate  between  class  or  section,  and  that  taxation  should  be  limited  by 
the  needs  of  the  Government,  honestly  and  economically  administered.  We 
denounce  as  disturbing  to  business  the  Republican  threat  to  restore  the  Mc- 
Kinley  law,  which  has  twice  been  condemned  by  the  people  in  National  elec- 
tions, and  which,  enacted  under  the  false  plea  of  protection  to  home  industry, 
proved  a  prolific  breeder  of  trusts  and  monopolies,  enriched  the  few  at  the 
expense  of  the  many,  restricted  trade  and  deprived  the  producers  of  the  great 
American  staples  of  access  to  their  natural  markets. 

Until  the  money  question  is  settled  we  are  opposed  to  any  agitation  for 
further  changes  in  our  tariff  laws,  except  such  as  are  necessary  to  meet  the 
deficit  in  revenue  caused  by  the  adverse  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  on  the 
income  tax.  But  for  this  decision  by  the  Supreme  Court  there  would  be  no 
deficit  in  the  revenue  under  the  law  passed  by  a  Democratic  Congress  in  strict 
pursuance  of  the  uniform  decisions  of  that  court  for  nearly  one  hundred  years, 
that  court  having  in  that  decision  sustained  Constitutional  objections  to  its 
enactment  which  had  previously  been  overruled  by  the  ablest  judges  who  have 
ever  sat  on  that  bench.  We  declare  that  it  is  the  duty  of  Congress  to  use  all 
the  Constitutional  power  which  remains  after  that  decision,  or  which  may  come 
from  its  reversal  by  the  court  as  it  may  hereafter  be  constituted,  so  that  the 
burdens  of  taxation  may  be  equally  and  impartially  laid,  to  the  end  that  wealth 
may  bear  its  due  proportion  of  the  expense  of  the  Government. 


408  DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM. 

We  hold  that  the  most  efficient  way  of  protecting  American  labor  is  to  pre- 
vent the  importation  of  foreign  pauper  labor  to  compete  with  it  in  the  home 
market,  and  that  the  value  of  the  home  market  to  our  American  farmers  and 
artisans  is  greatly  reduced  by  a  vicious  monetary  system  which  depresses  the 
prices  of  their  products  below  the  cost  of  production,  and  thus  deprives  therti 
of  the  means  of  purchasing  the  products  of  our  home  manufactories;  and  as 
labor  creates  the  wealth  of  the  country,  we  demand  the  passage  of  such  laws 
as  may  be  necessary  to  protect  it  in  all  its  rights. 

We  are  in  favor  of  the  arbitration  of  differences  between  employers  engaged 
in  interstate  commerce  and  their  employes,  and  recommend  such  legislation 
as  is  necessary  to  carry  out  this  principle. 

The  absorption  of  wealth  by  the  few,  the  consolidation  of  our  leading  rail- 
road systems,  and  the  formation  of  trusts  and  pools  require  a  stricter  control 
by  the  Federal  Government  of  those  arteries  of  commerce.  We  demand  the 
enlargement  of  the  powers  of  the  Inter-State  Commerce  Commission  and  such 
restriction  and  guarantees  in  the  control  of  railroads  as  will  protect  the  people 
from  robbery  and  oppression. 

We  denounce  the  profligate  waste  of  the  money  wrung  from  the  people  by 
oppressive  taxation  and  the  lavish  appropriations  of  recent  Republican  Con- 
gresses, which  have  kept  taxes  high,  while  the  labor  that  pays  them  is  unem- 
ployed and  the  products  of  the  people's  toil  are  depressed  in  price  till  they  no 
longer  repay  the  cost  of  production.  We  demand  a  return  to  that  simplicity 
and  economy  which  befits  a  Democratic  Government  and  a  reduction  in  the 
number  of  useless  offices  the  salaries  of  which  drain  the  substance  of  the  people. 

We  denounce  arbitrary  interference  by  Federal  authorities  in  local  affairs 
as  a  violation  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and  a  crime  against 
free  institutions,  and  we  especially  object  to  government  by  injunction  as  a 
new  and  highly  dangerous  form  of  oppression  by  which  Federal  judges,  in 
contempt  of  the  laws  of  the  States  and  rights  of  citizens,  become  at  once  legis- 
lators, judges,  executioners;  and  we  approve  the  bill  passed  at  the  last  session 
of  the  United  States  Senate,  and  now  pending  in  the  House  of  Representatives, 
relative  to  contempts  in  Federal  courts  and  providing  for  trials  by  jury  in 
certain  cases  of  contempt. 

No  discrimination  should  be  indulged  in  by  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  in  favor  of  any  of  its  debtors.  We  approve  of  the  refusal  of  the  Fifty- 
third  Congress  to  pass  the  Pacific  Railroad  Funding  bill  and  denounce  the  effort 
of  the  present  Republican  Congress  to  enact  a  similar  measure. 

Recognizing  the  just  claims  of  deserving  Union  soldiers,  we  heartily  in- 
dorse the  rule  of  the  present  Commissioner  of  Pensions,  that  no  names  shall 
be  arbitrarily  dropped  from  the  pension  roll;  and  the  fact  of  enlistment  and 
service  should  be  deemed  conclusive  evidence  against  disease  and  disability  be- 
fore enlistment. 

We  favor  the  admission  of  the  Territories  of  New  Mexico,  Arizona  and 
Oklahoma  into  the  Union  as  States,  and  we  favor  the  early  admission  of  all 
the  Territories  having  the  necessary  population  and  resources  to  entitle  them  to 
Statehood,  and,  while  they  remain  Territories,  we  hold  that  the  officials  ap- 
pointed to  administer  the  government  of  any  Territory,  together  with  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia  and  Alaska,  should  be  bona  fide  residents  of  the  Territory 


DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM.  409 

or  District  in  which  their  duties  are  to  be  performed.  The  Democratic  party 
believes  in  home  rule  and  that  all  public  lands  of  the  United  States  should  be 
appropriated  to  the  establishment  of  free  homes  for  American  citizens. 

We  recommend  that  the  Territory  of  Alaska  be  granted  a  delegate  in  Con- 
gress and  that  the  general  land  and  timber  laws  of  the  United  States  be  extended 
to  said  Territory. 

The  Monroe  doctrine,  as  originally  declared,  and  as  interpreted  by  suc- 
ceeding Presidents,  is  a  permanent  part  of  the  foreign  policy  of  the  United 
States  and  must  at  all  times  be  maintained. 

We  extend  our  sympathy  to  the  people  of  Cuba  in  their  heroic  struggle  for 
liberty  and  independence. 

We  are  opposed  to  life  tenure  in  the  public  service,  except  as  provided  in 
the  Constitution.  We  favor  appointments  based  on  merit,  fixed  terms  of  office, 
and  such  an  administration  of  the  civil-service  laws  as  will  afford  equal  opportu- 
nities to  all  citizens  of  ascertained  fitness. 

We  declare  it  to  be  the  unwritten  law  of  this  Republic,  established  by  cus- 
tom and  usage  of  one  hundred  years  and  sanctioned  by  the  examples  of  the 
greatest  and  wisest  of  those  who  founded  and  have  maintained  our  Government, 
that  no  man  should  be  eligible  for  a  third  term  of  the  Presidential  office. 

The  Federal  Government  should  care  for  and  improve  the  Mississippi  River 
and  other  great  waterways  of  the  Republic,  so  as  to  secure  for  the  interior 
States  easy  and  cheap  transportation  to  tide  water.  When  any  waterway  of 
the  Republic  is  of  sufficient  importance  to  demand  aid  of  the  Government,  such 
aid  should  be  extended  upon  a  definite  plan  of  continuous  work  until  permanent 
improvement  is  secured. 

Confiding  in  the  justice  of  our  cause  and  the  necessity  of  its  success  at  the 
polls,  we  submit  the  foregoing  declaration  of  principles  and  purposes  to  the 
considerate  judgment  of  the  American  people.  We  invite  the  support  of  all 
citizens  who  approve  them  and  who  desire  to  have  them  made  effective  through 
legislation,  for  the  relief  of  the  people  and  the  restoration  of  the  country's 
prosperity. 

Letter  Accepting  Democratic  Nomination. 

Lincoln,  Neb.,  Sept.  9,  1896. 

Hon.  Stephen  M.  White  and  others,  members  of  the  Notification  Com- 
mittee of  the  Democratic  National  Convention:  Gentlemen — I  accept  the 
nomination  tendered  by  you  on  behalf  of  the  Democratic  party,  and  in 
so  doing  desire  to  assure  you  that  I  fully  appreciate  the  high  honor  which 
such  a  nomination  confers  and  the  grave  responsibilities  which  accompany 
an  election  to  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States.  So  deeply  am  I  im- 
pressed with  the  magnitude  of  the  power  vested  by  the  Constitution  in  the 
chief  executive  of  the  nation  and  with  the  enormous  influence  which  he  can 
wield  for  the  benefit  or  injury  of  the  people  that  I  wish  to  enter  the  office, 
if  elected,  free  from  every  personal  desire  except  the  desire  to  prove  worthy 
of  the  confidence  of  my  countrymen.  Human  judgment  is  fallible  enough 
when  unbiased  by  selfish  considerations,  and,  in  order  that  I  may  not  be 
tempted  to  use  the  patronage  of  the  office  to  advance  any  personal  ambition, 
I  hereby  announce,  with  all  the  emphasis  which  words  can  express,  my  fixed 
determination  not,  under  any  circumstances,  to  be  a  candidate  for  re-election, 
in  case  this  campaign  results  in  my  election. 


410  DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM. 

I  have  carefully  considered  the  platform  adopted  by  the  Democratic  Na- 
tional Convention  and  unqualifiedly  endorse  each  plank  thereof. 

Our  institutions  rest  upon  the  proposition  that  all  men,  being  created 
equal,  are  entitled  to  equal  consideration  at  the  hands  of  the  Government. 
Because  all  men  are  created  equal  it  follows  that  no  citizen  has  a  natural  right 
to  injure  any  other  citizen.  The  main  purpose  of  government  being  to  protect 
all  citizens  in  the  enjoyment  of  life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness, 
this  purpose  must  lead  the  Government,  first  to  avoid  acts  of  affirmative  in- 
justice, and,  second,  to  restrain  each  citizen  from  trespassing  upon  the  rights 
of  any  other  citizen. 

A  democratic  form  of  government  is  conducive  to  the  highest  civilization 
because  it  opens  before  each  individual  the  greatest  opportunities  for  develop- 
ment, and  stimulates  to  the  highest  endeavor  by  insuring  to  each  the  full  en- 
joyment of  all  the  rewards  of  toil  except  such  contribution  as  is  necessary  to 
support  the  government  which  protects  him.  Democracy  is  indifferent  to 
pedigree — it  deals  with  the  individual  rather  than  with  his  ancestors.  Democracy 
ignores  differences  in  wealth — neither  riches  nor  poverty  can  be  invoked  in 
behalf  of  or  against  any  citizen.  Democracy  knows  no  creed — recognizing  the 
right  of  each  individual  to  worship  God  according  to  the  dictates  of  his 
own. conscience,  it  welcomes  all  to  a  common  brotherhood  and  guarantees 
equal  treatment  to  all,  no  matter  in  what  church  or  through  what  forms  they 
commune  with  their  Creator. 

Having  discussed  portions  of  the  platform  at  the  time  of  its  adoption 
and  again  when  your  letter  of  notification  was  formally  delivered,  it  will 
not  be  necessary  at  this  time  to  touch  upon  all  subjects  embraced  in  the 
party's  declaration. 

Honest  differences  of  opinion  have  ever  existed  and  ever  will  exist  as 
to  the  most  effective  means  of  securing  domestic  tranquillity,  but  no  citizen 
fails  to  recognize  at  all  times  and  under  all  circumstances  the  absolute  necessity 
for  the  prompt  and  vigorous  enforcement  of  law  and  the  preservation  of  the 
public  peace.  In  a  government  like  ours  law  is  but  the  crystallization  of  the 
will  of  the  people;  without  it  the  citizen  is  neither  secure  in  the  enjoyment  of  life 
and  liberty,  nor  protected  in  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  Without  obedience 
to  law,  government  is  impossible.  The  Democratic  party  is  pledged  to  defend 
the  Constitution  and  enforce  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  and  it  is  also 
pledged  to  respect  and  preserve  the  dual  scheme  of  government  instituted  by  the 
founders  of  the  Republic.  The  name,  United  States,  was  happily  chosen.  It 
combines  the  idea  of  national  strength  with  the  idea  of  local  self-government 
and  suggests  "an  indissoluble  union  of  indestructible  States."  Our  revo- 
lutionary fathers,  fearing  the  tendencies  towards  centralization,  as  well  as  the 
dangers  of  disintegration,  guarded  against  both,  and  national  safety,  as  well 
as  domestic  security,  is  to  be  found  in  the  careful  observance  of  the  limitations 
which  they  imposed.  It  will  be  noticed  that,  while  the  United  States  guarantees 
to  every  State  a  republican  form  of  government  and  is  empowered  to  protect 
each  State  against  invasion,  it  is  not  authorized  to  interfere  in  the  domestic 
affairs  of  any  State  except  upon  application  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State,  or 
upon  the  application  of  the  executive  when  the  Legislature  cannot  be  con- 
vened. 


DEMOCRA  TIC  PLA  TFORM.  4 1 1 

This  provision  rests  upon  the  sound  theory  that  the  people  of  the  State, 
acting  through  their  legally  chosen  representatives,  are,  because  of  their 
more  intimate  acquaintance  with  local  conditions,  better  qualified  than  the 
President  to  judge  of  the  necessity  for  federal  assistance.  Those  who  framed 
our  Constitution  wisely  determined  to  make  as  broad  an  application  of  the 
principles  of  local  self-government  as  circumstances  would  permit,  and  we 
cannot  dispute  the  correctness  of  the  position  taken  by  them  without  expressing 
a  distrust  of  the  people  themselves. 

Since  governments  exist  for  the  protection  of  the  rights  of  the  people  and 
not  for  their  spoliation,  no  expenditure  of  public  money  can  be  justified  unless 
that  expenditure  is  necessary  for  the  honest,  economical  and  efficient  administra- 
tion of  the  government.  In  determining  what  appropriations  are  necessary  the 
interests  of  those  who  pay  the  taxes  should  be  consulted,  rather  than  the  wishes 
of  those  who  receive  or  disburse  public  moneys. 

An  increase  in  the  bonded  debt  of  the  United  States  at  this  time  is  en- 
tirely without  excuse.  The  issue  of  interest  bearing  bonds  within  the  last 
few  years  has  been  defended  on  the  ground  that  they  were  necessary  to  secure 
gold  with  which  to  redeem  United  States  notes  and  Treasury  notes,  but  this 
necessity  has  been  imaginary  rather  than  real.  Instead  of  exercising  the  legal 
right  vested  in  the  United  States  to  redeem  its  coin  obligations  in  either  gold 
or  silver,  the  executive  branch  of  the  Government  has  followed  a  precedent 
established  by  a  former  administration  and  surrendered  the  option  to  the 
holder  of  the  obligations.  This  administrative  policy  leaves  the  Government 
at  the  mercy  of  those  who  find  a  pecuniary  profit  in  bond  issues.  The  fact  that 
the  dealers  in  money  and  securities  have  been  able  to  deplete  or  protect  the 
Treasury  according  to  their  changing  whims  shows  how  dangerous  it  is  to 
permit  them  to  exercise  a  controlling  influence  over  the  Treasury  Department. 
The  Government  of  the  United  States,  when  administered  in  the  interest  of  all 
the  people,  is  able  to  establish  and  enforce  its  financial  policy,  not  only  without 
the  aid  of  syndicates,  but  in  spite  of  any  opposition  which  syndicates  may 
present.  To  assert  that  the  Government  is  dependent  upon  the  good  will 
or  assistance  of  any  portion  of  the  people  other  than  a  constitutional  majority 
is  to  assert  that  we  have  a  government  in  form  but  without  vital  force. 

The  position  taken  by  the  platform  against  the  issue  of  paper  money  by 
national  banks  is  supported  by  the  highest  Democratic  authority,  as  well  as 
demanded  by  the  interests  of  the  people.  The  present  attempt  of  the  national 
banks  to  force  the  retirement  of  United  States  notes  and  Treasury  notes, 
in  order  to  secure  a  basis  for  a  larger  issue  of  their  own  notes,  illustrates  the 
danger  which  arises  from  permitting  them  to  issue  their  paper  as  a  cir- 
culating medium.  The  national  bank  note,  being  redeemable  in  lawful  money 
has  never  been  better  than  the  United  States  note  which  stands  behind  it,  and  yet 
the  banks  persistently  demand  that  these  United  States  notes,  which  draw  no 
interest,  shall  give  place  to  interest-bearing  bonds  in  order  that  the  banks 
may  collect  the  interest  which  the  people  now  save.  To  empower  national 
banks  to  issue  circulating  notes  is  to  grant  a  valuable  privilege  to  a  favored 
class,  surrender  to  private  corporations  the  control  of  the  volume  of  paper 
money,  and  build  up  a  class  which  will  claim  a  vested  interest  in"  the  nation's 
financial  poHcy.     Our  United  States  notes,  commonly  known  as  greenbacks, 


4 1 2  DEMOCRA  TIC  PL  A  TFORM. 

being  redeemable  in  either  gold  or  silver  at  the  option  of  the  Government, 
and  not  at  the  option  of  the  holder,  are  safer  and  cheaper  for  the  people  than 
national  bank  notes  based  upon  interest-bearing  bonds. 

A  dignified  but  firm  maintenance  of  the  foreign  policy  first  set  forth  by 
President  Monroe  and  reiterated  by  the  Presidents  who  have  succeeded  him, 
instead  of  arousing  hostility  abroad,  is  the  best  guaranty  of  amicable  rela- 
tions with  other  nations.  It  is  better  for  all  concerned  that  the  United  States 
should  resist  any  extension  of  European  authority  in  the  western  hemisphere 
rather  than  invite  the  continual  irritation  which  would  necessarily  result  from 
any  attempt  to  increase  the  influence  of  monarchical  institutions  over  that  por- 
tion of  the  Americas  which  has  been  dedicated  to  republican  government. 

No  nation  can  afford  to  be  unjust  to  its  defenders.  The  care  of  those 
who  have  suffered  injury  in  the  military  and  naval  service  of  the  country  is  a 
sacred  duty.  A  nation  which,  like  the  United  States,  relies  upon  volunteer 
service  rather  than  upon  a  large  standing  army,  adds  to  its  own  security 
when  it  makes  generous  provision  for  those  who  have  risked  their  lives  in  its 
defense,  and  for  those  who  are  dependent  upon  them. 

Labor  creates  capital.  Until  wealth  is  produced  by  the  application  of  brain 
and  muscle  to  the  resources  of  the  country  there  is  nothing  to  divide  among 
the  non-producing  classes  of  society.  Since  the  producers  of  wealth  create  the 
nation's  prosperity  in  times  of  peace  and  defend  the  nation's  flag  in  times  of 
peril,  their  interests  ought  at  all  times  to  be  considered  by  those  who  stand 
in  official  positions.  The  Democratic  party  has  ever  found  its  voting  strength 
among  those  who  are  proud  to  be  known  as  the  common  people,  and  it 
pledges  itself  to  propose  and  enact  such  legislation  as  is  necessary  to  p'rotect 
the  masses  in  the  free  exercise  of  every  political  right  and  in  the  enjoyment 
of  their  just  share  of  the  rewards  of  their  labor. 

I  desire  to  give  special  emphasis  to  the  plank  which  recommends  such 
legislation  as  is  necessary  to  secure  the  arbitration  of  differences  between 
en\ployers  engaged  in  interstate  commerce  and  their  employes.  Arbitration 
is  not  a  new  idea — it  is  simply  an  extension  of  the  court  of  justice.  The  laboring 
men  of  the  country  have  expressed  a  desire  for  arbitration,  and  the  railroads 
cannot  reasonably  object  to  the  decisions  rendered  by  an  impartial  tribunal. 
Society  has  an  interest  even' greater  than  the  interest  of  employer  and  employe, 
and  has  a  right  to  protect  itself  by  courts  of  arbitration  against  the  growing 
inconvenience  and  embarrassment  occasioned  by  disputes  between  those  who 
own  the  great  arteries  of  commerce  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  laborers  who 
operate  them  on  the  other. 

While  the  Democratic  party  welcomes  to  the  country  those  who  come  with 
love  for  the  institutions  and  with  the  determination  and  ability  to  contribute 
to  the  strength  and  greatness  of  our  nation,  it  is  opposed  to  the  dumping 
of  the  criminal  classes  upon  our  shores  and  to  the  importation  of  either 
pauper  or  contract  labor  to  compete  with  American  labor. 

The  recent  abuses  which  have  grown  out  of  injunction  proceedings  have 
been  so  emphatically  condemned  by  public  opinion  that  the  Senate  bill  providing 
for  trial  by  jury  in  certain  contempt  cases  will  meet  with  general  approval. 

The  Democratic  party  is  opposed  to  trusts.  It  would  be  recreant  to  its  duty 
to  the  people  of  the  country  if  it  recognized  either  the  moral  or  the  legal  right 


DEMOCRA  TIC  PLA  TFORM.  4 1 3 

of  these  great  aggregations  of  wealth  to  stifle  competition,  bankrupt  rivals  and 
then  prey  upon  society.  Corporations  are  the  creatures  of  law,  and  they  must 
not  be  permitted  to  pass  from  under  the  control  of  the  power  which  created 
them;  they  are  permitted  to  exist  upon  the  theory  that  they  advance  the  public 
weal,  and  they  must  not  be  allowed  to  use  their  powers  for  the  public  injury. 

The  right  of  the  United  States  Government  to  regulate  interstate  commerce 
cannot  be  questioned,  and  the  necessity  for  the  vigorous  exercise  of  that  right 
is  becoming  more  and  more  imperative.  The  interests  of  the  whole  people 
require  such  an  enlargement  of  the  powers  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission as  will  enable  it  to  prevent  discrimination  between  persons  and  places, 
and  protect  patrons  from  unreasonable  charges. 

The  Government  cannot  afford  to  discriminate  between  its  debtors  and 
must,  therefore,  prosecute  its  legal  claims  against  the  Pacific  railroads.  Such 
a  policy  is  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  rights  of  the  patrons  as  well  as  for 
the  interests  of  the  Government. 

The  people  of  the  United  States,  happy  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  blessings 
of  free  government,  feel  a  generous  sympathy  toward  all  who  are  endeavoring 
to  secure  like  blessings  for  themselves.  This  sympathy,  while  respecting  all 
treaty  obligations,  is  especially  active  and  earnest  when  excited  by  the  struggles 
of  neighboring  peoples,  who,  like  the  Cubans,  are  near  enough  to  observe  the 
workings  of  a  government  which  derives  all  its  authority  from  the  consent  of 
the  governed. 

That  the  American  people  are  not  in  favor  of  life  tenure  in  the  civil  service 
is  evident  from  the  fact  that  they,  as  a  rule,  make  frequent  changes  in  their 
official  representatives  when  those  representatives  are  chosen  by  ballot.  A 
permanent  office-holding  class  is  not  in  harmony  with  our  institutions.  A  fixed 
term  in  appointive  offices,  except  where  the  Federal  Constitution  now  provides 
otherwise,  would  open  the  public  service  to  a  larger  number  of  citizens  without 
impairing  its  efficiency. 

The  territorial  form  of  government  is  temporary  in  its  nature  and  should 
give  way  as  soon  as  the  territory  is  sufficiently  advanced  to  take  its  place 
among  the  States.  New  Mexico,  Oklahoma,  and  Arizona  are  entitled  to  State- 
hood, and  their  early  admission  is  demanded  by  their  material  and  political 
interests.  The  demand  of  the  4)latform  that  officials  appointed  to  administer 
the  government  of  the  Territories,  the  District  of  Columbia,  and  Alaska, 
should  be  bona  fide  residents  of  the  Territories  or  District  is  entirely  in  keeping 
with  the  Democratic  theory  of  home  rule.  I  am  also  heartily  in  symapthy  with 
the  declaration  that  all  public  lands  should  be  reserved  for  the  establishment 
of  free  homes  for  American  citizens. 

The  policy  of  improving  the  great  waterways  of  the  country  is  justified 
by  the  national  character  of  those  waterways  and  the  enormous  tonnage  borne 
upon  them.  Experience  has  demonstrated  that  continuing  appropriations  are, 
in  the  end,  more  economical  than  single  apropriations  separated  by  long  in- 
tervals. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  discuss  the  tariff  question  at  this  time.  Whatever 
may  be  the  individual  views  of  citizens  as  to  the  relative  merits  of  protection 
and  tariff  reform,  all  must  recognize  that,  until  the  money  question  is  fully  and 
finally  settled,  the  American  people  will  not  consent  to  the  consideration  of  any 


414  DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM. 

other  important  question.  Taxation  presents  a  problem  which  in  some  form 
is  continually  present,  and  a  postponement  of  definite  action  upon  it  involves 
no  sacrifice  of  personal  opinion  or  political  principles;  but  the  crisis  presented 
by  financial  conditions  cannot  be  postponed.  Tremendous  results  will  follow 
the  action  taken  by  the  United  States  on  the  money  question,  and  delay  is  im- 
possible. The  people  of  this  nation,  sitting  as  a  high  court,  must  render  judg- 
ment in  the  cause  which  greed  is  prosecuting  against  humanity.  The  decision 
will  either  give  hope  and  inspiration  to  those  who  toil  or  "shut  the  doors  of 
mercy  on  mankind."  In  the  presence  of  this  overshadowing  issue,  differences 
of  opinion  upon  minor  questions  must  be  laid  aside  in  order  that  there  may  be 
united  action  among  those  who  are  determined  that  progress  toward  an  univer- 
sal gold  standard  shall  be  stayed,  and  the  gold  and  silver  coinage  of  the  Consti- 
tution restored. 

The  determination  to  hold  the  office  for  but  one  term,  in  case  of 
election,  was  not  hastily  formed.  For  several  years  past  I  have  be- 
lieved that  the  Federal  Constitution  should  be  so  amended  as  to 
make  the  President  ineligible  for  re-election. 

During  the  Fifty-third  Congress  I  introduced  a  resolution  pro- 
viding for  the  submission  of  such  an  amendment.  A  favorable  report 
was  made,  but  I  was  unable  to  secure  its  consideration.  The  reasons 
for  this  amendment  have  been  so  forcibly  presented  by  others  that  I 
am  unable  to  add  anything  new. 

In  his  first  inaugural  message,  President  Jackson,  after  recom- 
mending the  election  of  the  President  by  a  direct  vote  of  the  people, 
added : 

In  connection  with  such  an  amendment  it  would  seem  advisable  to  limit  the 
service  of  the  chief  magistrate  to  a  single  term  of  either  four  or  six  years. 

Mr.  Hayes,  in  1876,  in  his  letter  accepting  the  Republican  nomi- 
nation, said: 

The  declaration  of  principles  by  the  Cincinnati  convention  makes  no  an- 
nouncement in  favor  of  a  single  presidential  term.  I  do  not  assume  to  add 
to  that  declaration,  but  believing  that  the  restoration  of  the  civil  service  to 
the  system  established  by  Washington  and  followed  by  the  early  presidents 
can  be  best  accomplished  by  an  executive  officer  who  is  under  no  temptation 
to  use  the  patronage  of  his  office  to  promote  his  own  re-election,  I  desire  to 
perform  what  I  regard  as  a  duty  in  stating  now  my  inflexible  purpose,  if 
elected,  not  to  be  a  candidate  for  election  to  a  second  term. 

Mr.  Cleveland  in  his  letter  of  August  18,  1884,  accepting  the  Demo- 
cratic nomination  for  the  Presidency,  said: 

When  an  election  to  office  shall  be  the  selection  by  the  voters  of  one  of 
their  number  to  assume  for  a  time  a  public  trust  instead  of  his  dedication 
to  the  profession  of  .politics;  when  the  holders  of  the  ballot,  quickened  by  a 
sense  of  duty,  shall  avenge  truth  betrayed  and  pledges  broken,  and  when  the 
suffrage   shall  be  altogether  free   and   uncorrupted,   the   full   realization   of   a 


DEMOCRA  TIC  FLA  TFORM.  4 1 5 

government  by  the  people  will  be  at  hand.  And  of  the  means  to  this  end,  not 
one  would,  in  my  judgment,  be  more  effective  than  an  amendment  to  the 
Constitution  disqualifying  the  President  from  re-election. 

When  we  consider  the  patronage  of  this  great  ofifice,  the  allurements  of 
power,  the  temptation  to  retain  public  place  once  gained,  and,  more  than  all, 
the  availability  a  party  finds  in  an  encumbent  whom  a  horde  of  ofifice  holders, 
with  zeal  born  of  benefits  received  and  fostered  by  the  hope  of  favors  yet 
to  come,  stand  ready  to  aid  with  money  and  trained  political  service,  we  recog- 
nize in  the  eligibility  of  the  President  for  re-election  a  most  serious  danger  to 
that  calm,  deliberate  and  intelligent  political  action  which  must  characterize 
a  government  by  the  people. 

I  do  not  think  that  any  one  will  attempt  to  answer  the  argument 
made  by  Mr.  Cleveland;  certainly  no  one  will  who  has  seen  a  political 
convention  dominated  by  "a  horde  of  office  holders,"  and  has  realized 
how  correctly  Mr.  Cleveland's  description  fits  those  who  exhibit  "a  zeal 
born  of  benefits  received  and  fostered  by  a  hope  of  favors  yet  to 
come."  If  it  is  said  that  crises  may  arise  in  which  a  second  term 
would  be  of  benefit  to  the  country,  I  reply,  first,  that  as  an  offset  to  this 
possible  danger  we  must  consider  the  danger,  equally  possible,  that  the 
President  may  be  led  to  make  a  crisis  for  his  own  benefit;  and,  second, 
that  whenever  this  nation  can  find  within  its  borders  but  one  man  quaH- 
fied  for  the  Presidency,  it  will  have  reached  a  condition  when  its  preser- 
vation will  be  a  matter  of  little  concern.  In  all  matters  of  government 
we  must  weigh  the  advantages  and  disadvantages  of  the  policies  pro- 
posed, and  I  am  convinced  that  the  dangers  which  arise  from  the  possi- 
bility of  a  second  term  are  greater  than  the  dangers  which  would  follow 
the  adoption  of  the  constitutional  amendment  proposed  by  Mr.  Cleve- 
land. 

In  expressing  my  opinion  upon  this  subject  as  emphatically  as 
possible,  both  upon  receiving  the  bulletin  announcing  my  nomination 
and,  later,  in  my  letter  of  acceptance,  I  desired  to  protect  myself  from 
myself  and,  by  removing  the  hope  of  a  re-election,  leave  nothing  to  in- 
terfere with  the  proper  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  office,  in  case 
election  should  follow. 

Our  opponents  endeavored  to  make  it  appear  that  the  income  tax 
plank  of  our  platform  assailed  the  Supreme  Court.  This  criticism  was 
entirely  without  foundation.  The  platform  commended  the  income 
tax,  and  suggested  the  possibility  that  the  court  might  hereafter  re- 
verse its  decision  and  return  to  the  earlier  precedents.  It  is  easier  to 
believe  that  the  court  will  some  day  return  to  the  construction  placed 
upon  the  Constitution  for  a  hundred  years  than  it  would  have  been, 
three  years  ago,  to  suppose  that  the  court  would  render  the  decision 


416  DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM. 

which  it  did.  A  future  court  has  a  right  to  declare  a  similar  income  tax 
law  constitutional.  Even  the  present  members  of  the  court  have  a  right 
to  change  their  opinions  on  this  subject  as  judges  have  in  the  past 
changed  their  opinions.  Therefore,  it  is  neither  treason  nor  sacrilege 
to  express  the  hope  that  an  income  tax  law  may  some  day  be  en- 
forced, even  without  a  change  in  the  Constitution.  If  I  may  be  par- 
doned for  expressing  my  own  opinion,  I  will  add  that  I  have  in  the 
past  advocated,  and  do  now  advocate,  an  amendment  to  the  Constitu- 
tion which  will  specifically  authorize  the  collection  of  an  income  tax, 
to  the  end  that  the  burdens  of  the  Federal  Government  may  be 
equitably  distributed  among  those  who  enjoy  the  protection  of  the 
Government. 

I  have  found  considerable  misunderstanding  among  the  people 
as  to  the  reason  for  bond  issues  during  the  present  administration. 
All  the  bonds  issued  were  issued  for  the  purpose  of  buying  gold,  but 
the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  the  bonds  were  used  to  make  good  the  de- 
ficit in  the  nation's  revenues.  The  Republicans  have  generally  in- 
sisted that  bonds  would  not  have  been  necessary  if  the  revenues  had 
equaled  the  expenditures;  but  this  argument,  it  seems  to  me,  is  with- 
out foundation.  While  bonds  would  have  been  necessary  to  make 
good  the  deficit,  they  may,  under  the  gold  standard,  be  issued  when  the 
revenue  is  sufificient.  The  revenues  are  not  necessarily  paid  in  gold, 
and  so  long  as  gold  can  be  drawn  out  at  will  by  the  holders  of  coin 
obligations,  the  gold  reserve  can  be  drained  regardless  of  the  con- 
dition of  the  revenues.  To  be  sure,  if  the  surplus  should  increase  until 
it  was  equal  to  the  total  amount  of  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes, 
these  obligations  might  be  held  in  the  Treasury  so  that  those  desiring 
gold  could  not  find  any  paper  upon  which  to  demand  it  from  the 
Government.  But  the -letter  written  by  Secretary  Carlisle  during  the 
campaign  sustains  the  position  taken  by  silver  advocates  and  shows 
that  even  in  case  all  paper  obligations  are  withdrawn,  gold  can  be 
drained  from  the  Treasury  by  the  presentation  of  silver  dollars  and 
silver  certificates.  We  must  either  have  one  standard  money  or  two.  If 
we  have  two,  the  government  cannot  undertake  to  redeem  one  with 
the  other. 

The  Democratic  platform  took,  in  my  judgment,  the  only  defensi- 
ble position  when  it  declared  that  the  Government  should  have  the 
right  to  redeem  coin  obligations  in  either  gold  or  silver.  In  this  w^ay, 
and  in  this  way  only,  can  the  Government  protect  itself.  As  early  as 
March  2,  1894,  I  introduced  a  bill  relating  to  this  subject.  It  was 
entitled:    "A  bill  to  construe  the  law  which  gives  the  Secretary  of  the 


?-^ 


^  /w*^ 


DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM.  419 

Treasury  the  right  to  redeem  coin  obligations  in  gold  or  silver,  at  his 
discretion,"  and  read  as  follows: 

Whereas  an  act  entitled  "An  act  directing  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion 
and  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes  thereon,  and  for  other  purposes,"  approved 
July  fourteenth,  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety,  provides  "that  upon  demand  of 
the  holder  of  any  of  the  Treasury  notes  herein  provided  for,  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  shall,  under  such  regulations  as  he  may  prescribe,  redeem  such  notes 
in  gold  or  silver  coin,  at  his  discretion,  it  being  the  established  policy  of  the 
United  States  to  maintain  the  two  metals  on  a  parity  with  each  other  upon 
the  present  legal  ratio,  or  such  ratio  as  may  be  provided  by  law;"  and. 

Whereas  this  provision  and  other  similar  provisions  for  redemption 
in  coin  have  been  construed  to  mean  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  has 
no  discretion,  but  must  redeem  in  that  coin  which  the  holder  of  the  obliga- 
tion demands;  and 

Whereas  such  construction  violates  both  the  letter  and  the  spirit  of  the 
law,  destroys  the  principle  of  bimetallism,  and  places  the  Treasury  at  the  mercy 
of  any  who  may  conspire  to  reduce  the  gold  reserve  for  the  purpose  of  forc- 
ing an   issue   of  bonds;   therefore. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United 
States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  all  obligations  heretofore  or 
hereafter  incurred  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  whether  such  obli- 
gations bear  interest  or  not,  which,  according  to  their  terms,  call  for  payment 
in  coin,  shall  be  payable  in  gold  or  silver  coin  of  present  weight  and  fineness, 
at  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and  the  right  of  the  holder 
of  any  such  obligation  to  demand  payment  in  a  particular  kind  of  coin,  whether 
gold  or  silver,  is  hereby  expressly  denied;  and  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury is  directed  to  maintain  gold  and  silver  coin  on  a  parity  with  each  other 
upon  the  present  legal  ratio,  or  such  ratio  as  may  be  provided  by  law,  by 
receiving  the  same  without  discrimination  against  either  metal,  in  payment  of 
all  public  dues,  customs,  and  taxes. 

During  the  last  campaign  the  relative  merits  of  national  bank 
currency  and  government  paper  were  discussed  to  some  extent,  and 
the  question  is  one  which  will  grow  in  importance  until  the  people 
finally  determine  whether  the  banks  or  the  people  shall  control  the 
volume  of  paper  money.  The  demand  for  the  retirement  of  green- 
backs comes  largely  from  the  national  banks,  and  the  reason  for  the 
demand  is  found  in  the  desire  of  the  banks  to  exercise  a  control  over, 
and  derive  a  profit  from,  the  issue  of  all  paper  intended  to  circulate 
as  money.  For  several  years  there  has  been  an  effort  on  foot  to  so 
change  existing  laws  as  to  permit  banks  to  issue  notes  up  to  the  par 
value  of  the  bonds  and  to  reduce  the  tax  upon  the  circulation  from  i 
per  cent,  to  ^  of  i  per  cent.  I  gave  in  my  letter  of  acceptance  the 
three  general  objections  to  banks  of  issue,  and  it  may  not  be  out  of 
place  here  to  enlarge  somewhat  upon  those  objections.  The  first  is, 
that  the  right  to  issue  paper  money  is  a  valuable  privilege,  and  to  grant 


420  DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM. 

it,  unless  imperatively  demanded  by  public  interests,  is  to  violate  the 
Democratic  principle,  ''Equal  rights  to  all  and  special  privileges  to 
none."  It  is  sometimes  urged  that  the  bank  is  only  permitted  to 
issue  its  notes  in  the  same  manner  that  an  individual  is  permitted  to 
issue  his.  It  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  a  corporation  can  safely 
be  permitted  to  do  everything  that  an  individual  does,  but,  in  this 
case,  the  coporation  asks  for  a  privilege  which  no  individual  desires. 
When  an  individual  issues  his  notes,  he  issues  them  for  the  purpose 
of  obtaining  money  and  pays  interest  upon  the  money,  while  the  bank 
desires  to  issue  its  notes  as  money  and  draw  interest  upon  them.  It 
has  sometimes  been  suggested  that  the  banks  might  be  allowed  to 
issue  up  to  the  face  of  the  bonds  and  be  relieved  from  all  tax  upon 
circulation,  provided  the  interest  on  the  bonds  is  forfeited  to  the 
Government  while  the  bank  notes  are  in  circulation.  But  this  has 
never  commended  itself  to  the  bankers,  because  it  takes  away  the 
profit  upon  the  issue. 

A  few  years  ago  it  was  proposed  by  some  to  have  the  Government 
issue  paper  money  and  loan  it  upon  farm  lands  at  2  per  cent,  per 
annum,  the  loan  not  to  exceed  50  per  cent,  of  the  value  of  the  land. 
This  proposition  was  merely  an  application  of  the  banker's  idea  to'  the 
farmer.  The  bank  puts  up  Government  bonds  for  security,  the  farmer 
wanted  to  put  up  land  for  security.  The  banker  borrows  90  per  cent. 
of  the  par  value  of  his  security,  while  the  farmer  was  willing  to  stop 
at  50  per  cent.  The  banker  now  pays  i  per  cent,  and  wants  it  re- 
duced to  :J  of  I  per  cent.,  while  the  farmer  was  willing  to  pay  2  per 
cent.  Those  who  oppose  the  national  bank  of  issue  can,  upon  prin- 
ciple, oppose  the  loaning  of  money  by  the  Government  to  any  par- 
ticular class  of  citizens.  But  how  can  the  advocate  of  a  national 
bank  of  issue  oppose  the  principle  which  underlies  the  sub-treasury? 
I  have  opposed  both.  In  answer  to  the  charge  of  favoritism,  it  is  said 
that  any  person  can  go  into  the  banking  business  and  thus  enjoy  the 
benefits  of  the  law.  I  reply  that  the  same  argument  would  justify  a 
bounty  to  lawyers  or  to  the  members  of  any  other  profession  or  occu- 
pation, because  all  professions  and  occupations  are  open  to  all  citizens. 

The  second  objection  to  the  bank  of  issue  is  that  the  volume  of 
the  currency,  when  controlled  by  private  individuals,  may  be  so  ad- 
justed as  to  benefit  those  who  exercise  the  control,  regardless  of  the 
interests  of  the  rest  of  the  people.  It  was  upon  this  ground,  largely, 
that  Jeflferson  opposed  banks  of  issue.  A  great  deal  is  said  about  the 
desirability  of  an  elastic  currency,  but  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  power  to  expand  or  contract  the  currency,  when  a  change  in  the 
volume  is  desirable,  carries  with  it  the  power  to  contract  or  expand 


DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM.  421 

it  when  the  change  may  not  be  desirable.  No  one  will  insist  that 
banks  are  conducted  by  men  who  are  entirely  unselfish,  and  until 
they  are,  it  will  not  be  safe  to  place  in  their  hands  so  great  a  power 
as  that  involved  in  the  right  to  control  the  volume  of  paper  money. 
Wendell  Phillips  pointed  out  this  danger  so  felicitously  that  I  incor- 
porated his  remarks  in  my  Boston  speech. 

The  third  objection  is  one  which  is  becoming  more  and  more 
apparent  every  day,  namely,  that  banks  of  issue,  when  once  estab- 
lished, claim  a  vested  right  in  the  nation's  financial  policy.  The 
national  banks  today  seem  to  resent  any  attempt  upon  the  part  of 
the  people  generally  to  hold  or  express  an  opinion  adverse  to  the 
banker's  policy.  They  assume  that  they  alone  are  able  to  under- 
stand such  questions  and  that  their  interests  alone  are  to  be  consid- 
ered. The  controversy  between  the  advocates  of  national  bank  cur- 
rency and  the  advocates  of  Government  currency  will  continue  until 
the  banks  retire  from  the  note  issuing  business,  or  until  the  Govern- 
ment retires  from  the  business  of  issuing  its  notes.  Government 
notes  which,  like  the  greenbacks,  are  redeemable  in  coin  on  demand, 
are  not  fiat  money;  they  have  all  the  advantages  which  can  be  urged 
in  favor  of  national  bank  currency  and,  in  addition  thereto,  have  the 
advantage  of  the  legal  tender  function. 

During  the  campaign  I  endeavored  to  center  public  attention  upon 
the  money  question,  but  on  several  occasions  spoke  of  the  growth 
of  trusts  and  argued  in  favor  of  their  extermination.  The  trust  is  in 
our  midst;  its  influence  is  on  the  increase;  it  must  be  grappled  with 
and  overthrown.  President  Cleveland,  in  his  last  message  to  Congress, 
treats  of  this  evil  in  the  following  language: 

Another  topic  in  which  our  people  rightfully  take  a  deep  interest  may  here 
be  briefly  considered.  I  refer  to  the  existence  of  trusts  and  other  huge  ag- 
gregations of  capital,  the  object  of  which  is  to  secure  the  monopoly  of 
some  particular  branch  of  trade,  industry  or  commerce,  and  so  stifle  wholesome 
competition.  When  these  are  defended,  it  is  usually  on  the  ground  that  though 
they  increase  profit  they  also  reduce  prices,  and  thus  may  benefit  the  public. 
It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  a  reduction  of  prices  to  the  people 
is  not  one  of  the  real  objects  of  these  organizations,  nor  is  their  tendency 
necessarily  in  that  direction.  If  it  occurs  in  a  particular  case,  it  is  only 
because  it  accords  with  the  purpose  or  interest  of  those  managing  the 
scheme.  Such  occasional  results  fall  far  short  of  compensating  the  palpable 
evils  charged  to  the  account  of  trusts  and  monopolies.  Their  tendency  is 
to  crush  out  individual  independence  and  to  hinder  or  prevent  the  free  use 
of  human  faculties  and  the  full  development  of  human  character.  Through 
them  the  farmer,  the  artisan  and  the  small  trader  is  in  danger  of  dislodgmcnt 
from  the  proud  position  of  being  his  own  master,  watchful  of  all  that  touches 


422  DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM. 

his  country's  prosperity,  in  which  he  has  an  individual  lot,  and  interested 
in  all  that  affects  the  advantages  of  business,  of  which  he  is  a  factor,  to  be 
relegated  to  the  level  of  a  mere  appurtenance  to  a  great  machine,  with  little 
free  will,  with  no  duty  but  that  of  passive  obedience,  and  with  little  hope  or 
opportunity  of  rising  in  the  scale  of  responsible  and  helpful  citizenship. 

To  the  instinctive  belief  that  such  is  the  inevitable  trend  of  trusts  and 
monopolies  is  due  the  widespread  and  deep-seated  popular  aversion  in  which 
they  are  held  and  the  most  unreasonable  insistence  that  whatever  may  be 
their  incidental  economic  advantages,  their  general  effect  upon  personal  char- 
acter, prospects  and  usefulness  cannot  be  otherwise  than  injurious. 

Though  Congress  has  attempted  to  deal  with  this  matter  by  legislation,  the 
laws  passed  for  that  purpose  thus  far  have  proved  ineffective,  not  because  of 
any  lack  of  disposition  or  attempt  to  enforce  them,  but  simply  because  the 
laws  themselves,  as  interpreted  by  the  courts,  do  not  reach  the  difficulty.  If 
the  insufficiencies  of  existing  laws  can  be  remedied  by  further  legislation,  it 
should  be  done. 

The  fact  must  be  recognized,  however,  that  all  federal  legislation  on  this 
subject  may  fall  short  of  its  purpose  because  of  inherent  obstacles,  and  also 
because  of  the  complex  character  of  our  governmental  system,  which,  wihle 
making  the  federal  authority  supreme  in  its  sphere,  has  carefully  limited  that 
sphere  by  metes  and  bounds  which  cannot  be  transgressed.  The  decision  of 
our  highest  court  on  this  precise  question  renders  it  doubtful  whether  the 
evils  of  trusts  and  monopolies  can  be  adequately  treated  through  federal 
action — unless  they  seek  directly  and  purposely  to  include  in  their  objects 
transportation  or  intercourse  between  states,  or  between  the  United  States  and 
foreign  countries. 

It  does  not  follow,  however,  that  this  is  the  limit  of  the  remedy  that  may 
be  applied.  Even  though  it  may  be  found  that  federal  authority  is  not  broad 
enough  to  fully  reach  the  case,  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  power  of  the 
several  States  to  act  effectively  in  the  premises,  and  there  should  be  no 
reason  to  doubt  their  willingness  to  judiciously  exercise  such  power. 

If  the  trust  could  be  exterminated  by  messages  it  would  long  ago 
have  passed  into  "innocuous  desuetude";  but  it  requires  more  than 
official  criticism  to  eradicate  such  an  evil.  If  trusts  exist  in  violation 
of  law,  they  can  be  exterminated  only  by  the  enforcement  of  the  law. 
If  present  laws  are  insufficient,  new  and  sufficient  laws  can  be 
devised.  If  the  Constitution,  which  has  been  so  construed  as  to 
prevent  the  taxation  of  the  incomes  of  corporations,  can  be  so  con- 
strued as  to  protect  trusts,  it  is  high  time  for  a  constitutional  amend- 
ment which  will  enable  the  American  people  to  protect  themselves 
from  trusts. 

Our  country  has,  in  my  judgment,  much  to  fear  from  the  political 
influence  exerted  by  large  corporations.  The  business  of  the  country 
is  falling  more  and  more  into  the  hands  of  corporations,  and  since 
a  lawyer  receives  both  his  reputation  and  his  experience  from  his 


DBMOCRATIC  PLATFORM.  423 

practice,  the  attorneys  for  the  great  corporations  come  to  be  con- 
sidered the  leading  attorneys  at  their  respective  bars.  In  appoint- 
ments to  pubUc  office,  corporation  attorneys  have  not  only  the  advan- 
tage which  their  professional  prominence  gives  them,  but  they  also 
have  the  advantage  of  friendly  relations  with  the  prominent  officials 
of  other  corporations.  Thus  it  may  happen,  without  the  intention 
of  the  appointing  power  (and  it  may  happen  the  more  easily  with  the 
intention  of  the  appointing  power),  that  officials  appointed  to  enforce 
the  law  will  be  biased  against  the  law  which  is  to  be  enforced.  It 
may  even  happen  that  judges  upon  the  bench  will  retain  after  appoint- 
ment the  bias  acquired  in  corporation  practice.  Public  officials, 
whether  executive,  legislative  or  judicial,  are  but  human  beings,  and 
in  making,  interpreting  and  executing  the  law,  may  be  unconsciously 
influenced  by  preconceived  opinions  or  present  associations.  I  be- 
lieve that  the  continued  existence  of  the  trust  is  largely  due  to  the 
fact  that  many  public  officials,  without  openly  defending  it,  are  at 
heart  friendly  to  it. 

The  pension  plank  of  our  platform,  so  far  as  I  know,  escaped  seri- 
ous criticism,  and  my  Congressional  record  upon  this  subject  was  not 
assailed.  But  the  Republicans  circulated  far  and  wide  an  editorial 
which  appeared  in  the  Omaha  World-Herald  nearly  two  years  before 
I  became  connected  with  the  paper.  This  editorial,  which  criticised 
certain  pension  legislation  then  under  discussion,  was  used  by  some 
who  knew  that  I  was  in  no  way  responsible  for  it.  During  the  cam- 
paign several  prominent  generals  made  a  tour  of  the  country  and 
appealed  to  the  veterans  to  support  the  Republican  ticket,  but  their 
arguments  were  directed  against  free  coinage,  rather  than  against  the 
attitude  of  the  Democratic  party  on  the  subject  of  pensions.  It  is 
safe,  however,  to  assert  that  the  Republican  position  upon  the  money 
question  drove  away  more  votes  than  it  drew  to  that  party. 

The  civil  service  plank  of  the  platform  aroused  hostile  criticism 
in  some  quarters.  An  attempt  was  made  to  array  the  civil  service 
employes  against  the  ticket  because  the  Democratic  party  declared 
against  life  tenure  in  the  civil  service.  I  only  referred  to  this  subject 
twice  during  the  campaign,  once  at  Washington,  in  a  speech  which 
will  be  found  in  another  chapter,  and  later  at  Chicago  in  a  speech 
which  was  delivered  late  in  the  evening  and  not  fully  reported.  I 
take  this  opportunity  to  express  myself  more  at  length. 

I  do  not  believe  that  life  tenure  is,  as  a  rule,  a  wise  thing  in  a 
government  like  ours.  As  suggested  in  my  letter  of  acceptance,  the 
fact  that  the  people  make  frequent  changes  in  their  public  officials  in 


424  DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM. 

case  of  elective  offices  is  conclusive  proof  that  life  tenure  is  not  popu- 
lar. If  they  desired  to  have  their  public  servants  hold  office  for 
life,  they  would  manifest  that  desire  by  keeping  elective  officials  in 
office  permanently.  As  long  as  human  nature  remains  as  it  is,  it 
will  not  be  safe  to  place  public  officials  in  a  position  where  they  are 
entirely  independent  of  those  whom  they  serve.  The  man  who  is 
permanently  provided  for,  no  matter  what  changes  may  take  place 
in  politics,  is  apt  to  become  indifferent  to  public  questions  and  be 
concerned  only  in  the  size  and  continuance  of  his  salary.  I  do  not 
mean  to  say  that  this  is  always  the  case,  but  it  is  too  apt  to  be  the 
case.  It  may  be  laid  down  as  a  sound  proposition  that,  in  a  republic, 
no  system  is  wise  which  tends  to  discourage  a  lively  interest  in  all 
matters  which  concern  the  government.  The  best  way  to  com- 
pel people  to  scrutinize  the  acts  of  public  officials  is  to  leave 
them  in  a  position  where  they  will  suffer  from  their  own  in- 
difference. Rotation  in  office  does  not,  however,  mean  that  all  public 
officials  must  necessarily  change  with  each  change  of  administration. 
Every  one  who  has  served  in  Congress  will  appreciate  the  embarrass- 
ment which  would  follow  if  members  of  Congress  were  compelled  to 
look  after  appointments  in  all  the  departments  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment. Not  only  would  it  be  embarrassing,  but  the  member  of  Con- 
gress is  not  in  a  position  to  sit  as  an  impartial  judge  and  decide  the 
relative  merits  of  those  who  ask  his  endorsement.  Without  entering 
into  details,  I  suggest  that  it  is  possible  to  place  the  civil  service  upon 
a  substantial  foundation  by  providing  a  fixed  term  for  appointments 
— with  the  possibility  of  one  reappointment  in  case  of  special  merit — 
the  appointments  to  be  divided  among  all  political  parties  in  propor- 
tion to  their  political  strength,  and  among  the  States  in  propor- 
tion to  their  population.  In  this  way  a  person  entering  the  service 
would  know  that  by  efficiency  he  could  secure  a  second  term,  and, 
knowing  that  his  service  would  end  at  the  close  of  the  second  term, 
could  make  arrangements  for  the  future.  At  present,  a  clerk  when  dis- 
charged without  warning  is  often  left  in  a  position  of  financial  embar- 
rassment. Then,  too,  when  each  party  has  its  proportionate  repre- 
sentation in  the  civil  service,  there  will  be  no  disposition  to  violate 
the  spirit  of  the  law,  as  both  parties  have  done  under  the  pres- 
ent system.  Until  each  party  is  given  its  share  of  the  offices, 
the  successful  party  will  be  tempted  to  secure  places  for  as  many  of 
its  members  as  possible.  Then,  too,  appointment  for  a  fixed  term 
places  the  appointee  in  a  position  of  political  independence,  where  he 
is  not  required  to  surrender  his  convictions  in  order  to  retain  his 


DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM.  425 

position.  I  need  hardly  add  that  the  examination  should  be  such 
as  to  test  the  fitness  of  the  candidate  for  the  work  to  be  done,  and 
not  to  determine  his  knowledge  upon  other  subjects.  Appointments 
for  a  fixed  term,  made  after  suitable  examination  and  in  proportion 
to  the  voting  strength  of  the  respective  parties,  would,  in  my  judg- 
ment, give  an  efficient  administration  of  the  public  service,  provide 
against  the  dangers  which  flow  from  life  tenure,  remove  the  question 
from  the  domain  of  partisan  politics  and  guarantee  political  inde- 
pendence to  subordinate  officials. 

During  the  campaign  our  opponents,  for  the  most  part,  avoided 
a  discussion  of  that  plank  of  our  platform  which  denounced  govern- 
ment by  injunction.  Our  position  was  so  generally  approved  that 
those  who  dissented  usually  did  so  in  silence. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  our  demand  for  arbitration.  The  prin- 
ciple of  arbitration  is  so  just  that  it  is  not  attacked  by  argument,  even 
when  secretly  disliked. 

Few  platforms  have  been  so  bitterly  assailed  as  the  one  adopted 
at  Chicago.  It  was  misunderstood  by  some  and  misrepresented  by 
more.  By  a  few  it  has  been  given  as  an  excuse  for  the  abandonment 
of  the  party,  but  to  millions  of  our  citizens  it  has  been  a  hope  and  an 
inspiration.  While  it  does  not  attempt  to  discuss  all  needed  reforms, 
it,  as  far  as  it  goes,  assails  existing  abuses  and  points  out  the  direc- 
tion from  which  relief  must  come. 


CHAPTER   XXIX. 


NOMINATION  OF  SILVER  PARTY  ACCEPTED 

I  ARRIVED  in  Lincoln  the  morning  of  September  8,  the  day  set 
for  receiving  formal  notification  of  the  silver  party  nomination. 
I  spoke  at  a  large  meeting  in  the  capital  grounds  in  the  afternoon 
and  discussed  "a  government  by  banks."  In  the  evening  Hon.  George 
A.  Groot,  of  Cleveland,  O.,  delivered  an  elaborate  address  in  defense 
of  bimetallism,  and  concluded  his  remarks  with  the  following: 

Mr.  Groot's  Speech. 

Hon.  William  Jennings  Bryan:  The  National  Silver  Convention  with  an 
unanimity  unexampled  in  the  history  of  national  conventions  in  this  country 
nominated  you  as  the  candidate  of  the  National  Silver  party  for  the  distinguished 
office  of  President  of  the  United  States.  You  are  now  the  candidate  for  the 
great  ofifice  of  President  of  three  great  political  parties  of  which  the  Silver 
party  is  not  the  least. 

The  convention  selected  a  committee  to  formally  notify  you  of  its  action 
and  that  committee  conferred  upon  me  the  distinguished  honor  of  advising 
you  of  your  nomination  as  the  candidate  of  the  National  Silver  party  for  ofnce 
of  President  of  the  United  States.  We  are  met,  therefore,  at  this  time  and 
place  for  the  purpose  of  performing  the  pleasant  duty  imposed  upon  us  by 
the  convention.  I  therefore,  in  obedience  to  the  wishes  of  the  committee  and 
of  the  convention,  hereby  formally  notify  you  that  you  have  been  nominated 
by  the  National  Silver  party  as  its  candidate  for  President,  and  request  that 
you  accept  that  nomination  in  the  same  spirit  in  which  it  has  been  tendered 
you. 

You  are  now  the  chosen  commander  of  a  grand  army,  composed  of  three 
grand  divisions,  which  is  now  mobilizing  for  the  purpose  of  fighting  in  be- 
half of  humanity  on  November  3,  1896,  the  most  important  political  battle  of 
this  or  of  any  other  age;  a  battle  which  is  to  determine  whether  this  nation 
shall  be  a  province  of  Great  Britain  and  be  governed  and  controlled  as  that 
nation  is  by  the  money  barons  of  Europe,  or  whether  it  shall  be,  as  the 
fathers  intended  it  to  be,  a  free  and  independent  and  sovereign  nation! 

The  people  who  constitute  that  grand  army,  inspired  as  they  are  by  the 
noblest  sentiments  of  patriotism,  under  your  leadership  will,  there  can  be 
no  doubt,  on  that  day  lift  high  their  banners  in  triumph  over  the  defeated 
allied  hosts  of  plutocracy! 

I  regret  that  I  have  not  been  able  to  secure  an  authentic  report  of 
the  Silver  Convention,  giving  the  names  of  the  Notification  Committee. 

My  reply  was  brief  and  is  as  follows: 

426 


NOMINATION  OF  SILVER  PARTY  ACCEPTED.  427 

Speech  Accepting  Nomination  of  National  Silver  Party. 

Hon.  George  A.  Groot,  Chairman,  and  others,  members  of  the  Notifi- 
cation Committee  of  the  National  Silver  Party:  Gentlemen — I  beg  to  reply 
at  this  time  without  the  formality  of  a  letter.  The  platform  of  the  Na- 
tional Silver  Convention  contains  but  one  plank  and  that  plank,  the  plank 
upon  the  silver  question,  is  identical  in  substance  with  the  silver  plank 
of  the  Chicago  platform.  As  I  have  already  discussed  the  subject  at 
length  in  accepting  the  Democratic  nomination  it  will  not  be  necessary  at  this 
time  to  enter  upon  any  argument  in  defense  of  bimetallism.  I  beg  to  assure  the 
committee  that  I  accept  the  nomination  tendered  on  behalf  of  the  National 
Silver  Party  in  the  spirit  in  which  it  is  tendered.  I  can  appreciate  the  feelings 
which  animated  those  who  assembled  in  the  Silver  Convention  and  turned 
their  backs  upon  the  party  with  which  they  had  formerly  been  associated. 

I  know  something  of  the  strength  of  party  ties  because  I  was  once  in  a 
position  where  I  looked  forward  to  the  possibility  of  like  action  upon  my  own 
part.  I  can  appreciate  the  depth  of  conviction  which  led  the  members  of  that 
convention  to  place  the  interests  of  their  country  above  the  welfare  of  a  party. 
More  than  a  year  ago  when  we  were  engaged  in  a  struggle  to  bring  the  Demo- 
cratic party  to  the  indorsement  of  free  coinage,  the  question  was  put  to  me 
whether,  in  case  of  failure,  I  would  support  the  Democratic  nominee,  if  he 
were  a  gold  standard  advocate  running  upon  a  gold  standard  platform.  I  never 
believed  that  the  Democratic  party  would  indorse  the  gold  standard,  but  when 
those  who  questioned  me  were  not  content  with  probabilities,  and  asked  again 
whether,  in  the  possible  event  of  the  Democratic  party  declaring  for  gold,  I 
would  support  the  nominee,  I  said,  as  you  will  remember,  that  under  no  cir- 
cumstances would  my  vote  be  given  to  a  man  who  would  use  the  influence  of 
thfe  executive  to  fasten  the  gold  standard  upon  the  American  people.  I  stood 
in  anticipation  where  the  members  of  the  Silver  Party  Convention  stood  in  fact. 
I,  like  them,  preferred  the  approval  of  my  conscience  to  the  approval  of  all 
others.  My  convictions  upon  this  subject  are  not  shallow  convictions.  I  may 
be  in  error — none  of  us  can  claim  infallibility — but  I  believe  that  the  gold 
standard  is  a  conspiracy  against  the  human  race.  I  would  no  more  join  the 
ranks  of  those  who  propose  to  fasten  it  upon  the  American  people  than  I  would 
enlist  in  an  army  which  was  marching  to  attack  my  home  and  destroy  my  fam- 
ily. I  repeat,  therefore,  that  I  appreciate  the  spirit  which  animated  those  who 
have  just  tendered  me  this  second  nomination,  and  I  can  accept  it  in  the  spirit 
in  which  it  is  tendered.  I  pledge  you  that,  if  elected,  you  shall  never  have 
occasion  to  accuse  me  of  being  false  to  that  platform. 

When  I  declared  that  I  would  not  support  a  gold  standard  candidate,  I 
was  standing  upon  the  record  of  the  Democratic  party;  I  was  defending  its 
principles  as  well  as  the  interests  of  the  country  at  large.  And  when  the  Re- 
publicans who  assembled  in  the  Silver  Convention  at  St.  Louis  refused  to 
worship  the  golden  image  which  their  party  had  set  up,  they  were  standing  upon 
the  record  of  the  Republican  party.  The  Republican  national  platform  of  i8S8 
denounced  the  Democratic  administration  for  having  attempted  to  degrade 
silver.  At  the  Lincoln  day  banquet,  in  Memorial  Hall  at  Toledo,  Ohio,  on 
February  12,  1891,  the  present  candidate  for  president  upon  the  Republican 
ticket  used  the  words  which  I  shall  now  read  to  you.     I  have  found  these  words 

24 


428  NOMINATION  OF  SILVER  PARTY  ACCEPTED. 

reproduced  in  a  Toledo  paper,  and  they  have  stood  so  long  without  correction 
that  I  may  safely  quote  them.  If  their  correctness  is  hereafter  denied  I  shall 
hasten  to  do  justice  to  the  Republican  candidate  by  retracting  them.  These  are 
the  words  which  he  is  said  to  have  used: 

During  all  of  Grover  Cleveland's  years  at  the  head  of  the  Government  he  was  dis- 
honoring one  of  our  precious  metals,  one  of  our  own  great  products,  discrediting  silver 
and  enhancing  the  price  of  gold.  He  endeavored  even  before  his  inauguration  to  office 
to  stop  the  coinage  of  silver  dollars,  and  afterwards,  and  to  the  end  of  his  administra- 
tion, persistently  used  his  power  to  that  end.  He  was  determined  to  contract  the 
circulating  medium  and  demonetize  one  of  the  coins  of  commerce,  limit  the  value 
of  money  among  the  people,  make  money  scarce,  and,  therefore,  dear.  He  would 
have  increased  the  value  of  money  and  diminished  the  value  of  everything  else — 
money  the  master,  everything  else  the  servant. 

Following  these  same  lines,  the  Republican  National  Convention,  in  1892, 
declared,  at  Minneapolis,  that  the  American  people  were,  from  tradition  and  in- 
terest, in  favor  of  bimetallism.  Have  traditions  changed  in  four  years?  Have 
interests  changed  in  four  years?  No,  my  friends;  but,  forgetting  the  platform 
of  1880,  forgetting  the  denunciation  uttered  by  their  distinguished  leader  in 
1891,  forgetting  the  platform  of  1892,  the  Republican  party,  in  national  conven- 
tion assembled,  declared  in  1896  that  the  American  people  must  forego  the 
advantages  of  the  bimetallic  system,  to  which  tradition  and  interests  endear 
them,  until  foreign  nations  shall  bring  these  advantages  to  them. 

Is  it  strange  that  men  who  have  looked  for  bimetallism  in  the  Republican 
party  should  at  last  give  up  hope  and  turn  elsewhere  for  relief?  These  Repub- 
licans cannot  be  criticised  for  leaving  the  Republican  party.  They  have  done 
what  every  American  citizen  has  a  right  to  do.  They  have  done  better  than  our 
Democratic  advocates  of  the  gold  standard,  because  these  Republicans,  when 
they  left  their  former  party,  openly  joined  with  those  who  had  a  chance  to  sufc- 
ceed,  while  our  Democratic  advocates  of  the  gold  standard  sought  to  secure 
the  election  of  the  Republican  candidates  by  nominating  separate  candidates. 

To  show  you  that  the  action  taken  by  these  Republicans  is  defended  by 
experience  and  example,  let  me  carry  you  back  to  the  period  just  preceding 
the  war.  If  you  will  turn  to  a  book  recently  published  entitled  "John  Slier- 
man's  Recollections,"  you  will  find,  on  page  112  of  the  first  volume,  a  portion 
of  a  speech  which  he  delivered  in  Congress  in  1856.     Let  me  read  this  extract: 

I  am  willing  to  stand  by  the  compromises  of  1820  and  1850,  but  when  our  Whig 
brethren  of  the  South  allow  this  administration  to  lead  them  off  from  their  principles, 
when  they  abandon  the  position  which  Henry  Clay  would  have  taken,  forget  his  name 
and  achievements,  and  decline  any  longer  to  carry  his  banner— they  lose  all  their 
claims  on  me.  And  I  say  now,  that  until  this  wrong  is  righted,  until  Kansas  is  ad- 
mitted as  a  free  State,  I  cannot  act  in  party  association  with  them. 

There  the  distinguished  Senator  from  Ohio  asserted  upon  the  floor  of 
Congress  that  he  was  willing  to  accept  compromise  after  compromise,  but 
that  the  time  had  at  last  come  when  he  could  go  with  his  party  associates 
no  further;  that  until  certain  things  were  accomplished  he  could  not  act 
with  them.  The  situation  today  is  but  a  repetition  of  history.  Compromises 
have  been  submitted  to  by  these  silver  Republicans  in  the  hope  that  the  party 
of  their  choice  and  love  would  at  last  bring  to  the  people  the  relief  which  they 
desired.  But  the  Republican  party,  like  the  Whig  party  in  1856,  has  been  led 
off  by  an  administration  until  it  has  deserted  its  traditions  and  its  platforms. 


NOMINATION  OF  SILVER  PARTY  ACCEPTED.  42^ 

and  these  silver  Republicans  have  a  right  to  say  to  their  former  associates: 
"We  will  act  with  you  no  longer  until  this  nation  is  redeemed." 

We  do  not  ask  those  who  present  this  nomination  to  pledge  their  future 
support  to  the  Democratic  party.  The  same  intelligence  which  directs  them 
today  in  the  discharge  of  duty  will  be  with  them  four  years  from  now  to 
direct  them  in  the  discharge  of  the  duties  which  will  then  arise.  The  same 
patriotism  which  leads  them  today  in  what  they  do  will  be  with  them  four  years 
from  now  to  guide  and  direct  them  then.  We  trust  them  now;  we  shall  trust 
them  then.  The  Democratic  party  has  proven  itself  worthy  of  their  confidence 
this  year,  and  it  receives  their  support.  If  four  years  from  now  it  proves  un- 
worthy of  their  confidence,  it  will  not  then  deserve  their  support. 

The  chairman  of  the  notification  committee  has  said  that  we  have  today 
to  meet  a  great  money  trust.  He  is  right.  We  are  now  confronted  by  the 
most  gigantic  trust  that  has  ever  been  formed  among  men.  Do  we  talk  about 
trusts  formed  to  control  the  prices  of  the  various  articles  which  we  use?  My 
friends,  all  these  trusts  combined  become  insignificant  when  compared  with  the 
money  trust  which  has  its  hands  upon  our  country.  Place  the  control  of  the 
.standard  money  of  the  world  in  the  hands  of  a  few  financiers,  and  times 
will  always  be  good  with  them  no  matter  what  distress  may  overtake  the  rest  of 
mankind.  I  believe  that  Mr.  Carlisle  did  not  exaggerate  when  he  said,  "The 
consummation  of  this  scheme  (to  destroy  silver  as  a  standard  money  through- 
out the  world)  means  more  of  misery  to  the  human  race  than  all  the  wars, 
pestilences,  and  famine  that  have  ever  occurred  in  the  history  of  the  world." 
Who  does  not  stand  appalled  before  such  misery?  Who  among  you  is  willing 
to  be  a  partner  in  such  a  conspiracy,  in  the  consummation  of  such  a  scheme? 
It  is  against  the  consummation  of  this  scheme  so  eloquently  and  so  forcibly  de- 
scribed by  Mr.  Carlisle,  that  the  silver  Republicans  have  risen  in  protest.  I 
respect  their  convictions.  And  through  you,  gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I 
thank  them  for  the  nomination  tendered.  All  that  I  can  promise  is  that  I 
shall  endeavor,  to  the  best  of  my  ability,  to  prove  worthy  of  their  confidence. 

Mr.  E.  Harrington,  of  Kansas,  and  Mr.  M.  F.  Dowd,  of  Mis- 
souri, announced  Mr.  Sewall's  nomination  and  he,  being  unavoidably 
absent,  I,  at  his  request,  accepted  for  him. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 


POPULIST  NOMINATION  TENDERED  AND  ACCEPTED. 

SENATOR  WILLIAM  V.  ALLEN,  of  Nebraska,  chairman  of 
the  Notification  Committee  appointed  by  the  Populist  Con- 
vention, tendered  the  Populist  nomination  in  a  letter,  which 

will  be  found  below. 

Populist  Notification. 

Madison,  Neb.,  September  15,  1896. 
Hon.  William  J.  Bryan,  Lincoln,  Nebraska. 

Dear  Sir:  At  a  convention  of  the  People's  party,  held  at  St.  Louis  from 
July  22d  to  25th,  of  the  current  year,  you  were  unanimously  nominated  for 
President  of  the  United  States,  to  be  voted  for  at  the  approaching  general 
election.  It  was  known  at  the  time  that  you  had  been  nominated  by  the 
Democratic  party  at  its  convention  held  at  Chicago  a  few  days  before  that 
time,  and  that  you  would,  in  all  probability,  accept  the  same  in  a  formal  man- 
ner. Your  nomination  by  the  People's  party,  was  not,  therefore,  made  with 
any  thought  that  you  were  a  Populist,  or  that  you  accepted  all  the  doctrines 
declared  by  the  St.  Louis  platform.  It  was  due  largely  to  the  fact  that  the 
money  question  is  the  overshadowing  political  issue  of  the  age;  and  because 
you  have  at  all  times  been  an  unswerving,  able,  and  fearless  advocate  of  the 
free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  and  gold,  on  terms  of  equality,  at  the  mints 
of  the  United  States,  at  the  ratio  of  sixteen  to  one. 

It  was  thought  also  that  the  observance  of  a  patriotic  duty  required  a 
union  of  all  reform  forces,  and  the  convention  took  the  liberty  without  solicita- 
tion or  consulting  you,  of  placing  your  name  before  the  people  as  its  standard 
bearer.  The  convention  was  in  doing  so  guided  by  deep  solicitude  for  the 
common  welfare,  acting  on  its  own  motion,  prompted  alone  by  a  desire  to 
bring  about  the  best  attainable  results. 

So  much  has  been  said  respecting  the  rehabilitation  of  silver  by  again  plac- 
ing it  in  our  coinage  acts  in  the  position  it  occupied  when  stealthily  demone- 
tized by  the  act  of  1873,  that  it  would  be  idle  for  us  to  discuss  the  question. 
You  will  observe  by  the  closing  language  of  the  St.  Louis  platform,  that  the 
convention  recognized  the  money  question  as  the  great  issue  of  the  day,  and 
because  Populists  believe  that  you  are  in  accord  with  them  on  this  question, 
you  will  receive  their  ballots  in  November. 

It  has  at  no  time  been  expected,  nor  is  it  now,  that  you  will  abandon  your 
the  candidate  who  stands  upon  a  platform  shall  endorse  the  utterances  of  the 
the  People's  party  platform,  however  gratifying  the  latter  would  be  to  all  Pop- 
ulists. It  must  be  understood  that  the  party  does  not  abate  one  jot  or  tittle  of 
loyalty  to  its  principles.  We  have  declared  ourselves  in  favor  of  many  impor- 
tant reforms,  and  go  farther  than  you  or  your  party  have  gone.    These  reforms 

430 


POPULIST  NOMINA  TION.  43 1 

are,  in  our  judgment,  essential  to  the  liberation  of  the  people  from  present 
unjust  and  iniquitous  industrial  bondage. 

In  accordance  with  precedent  of  our  party,  we  take  this  method  of  notifying 
you  of  your  nomination.  We  shall  not  send  a  committee,  according  to  old  party 
custom.  In  sending  this  letter  of  notification  of  the  great  honor  that  has  been 
so  justly  conferred  on  you  by  our  party,  it  is  needless  for  us  to  assure  you  that 
you  have  the  confidence  and  esteem  of  all.  Your  splendid  abilities,  known 
integrity,  competency  and  eminent  fitness  for  the  position,  justly  entitle  you  to 
a  high  rank  among  the  great  statesmen  of  the  nation. 

We  feel  that  in  the  event  of  your  election,  which  now  seems  certain,  that 
you  will  carry  into  execution  the  principles  of  monetary  reform,  to  the  end 
that  the  people  shall  enjoy  better  industrial  conditions.  It  is  not  anticipated 
that  this  can  be  done  with  undue  haste,  or  so  suddenly  as  to  wrench  or  dis- 
joint the  business  interests  of  the  country,  but  that  it  will  be  done  gradually 
and  in  a  way  to  infuse  confidence  and  hope  of  better  conditions  for  all. 

The  People's  party  will  exact  of  you  no  promises,  farther  than  those  made 
in  your  public  utterances  and  exemplified  in  a  life  devoted  to  the  welfare  of  the 
race,  nor  will  it  ask  you  to  abandon  the  party  of  which  you  are  an  honored 
member.  In  your  nomination  our  pbrty  has  risen  above  mere  partisan  sur- 
roundings adopting  a  high  plane  of  patriotism,  believing  that  a  division  of  forces 
would  result  in  the  election  of  William  McKinley,  the  foremost  advocate  of  a 
deeply  burdensome  and  unnatural  taxation  and  the  criminal  policy  of  the  single 
gold  standard,  resulting  ultimately,  if  not  in  some  manner  checked,  in  the  com- 
plete destruction  and  disintegration  of  our  form  of  government. 

Your  elevation  to  the  Chief  Magistracy  of  the  nation  would  be  regarded 
as  a  vindication  of  the  right  of  the  people  to  government,  and  we  entertain  no 
doubt  that  you  will  prove  a  worthy  successor  of  the  immortal  Jeflferson  and 
Lincoln,  and,  that  your  public  life,  like  theirs,  will  illustrate  the  purity  and 
loftiness  of  American  statesmanship.  Your  extensive  and  intimate  knowledge 
of  public  affairs,  and  the  duties  the  ofiice  will  impose,  gained  in  a  life  that  has 
been  devoted  to  upholding  the  cause  of  the  people,  as  well  as  your  keen  insight 
into  the  condition  of  our  country,  in  our  judgment,  highly  qualify  you,  to 
bring  about  a  change  in  a  way  that  will  work  injury  to  none  and  justice  to 
all,  thus  making  our  Government  in  fact,  as  it  is  now  in  form  only,  a  govern- 
ment "of,  by  and  for  the  people." 

We  have  the  honor  to  be 

Your  most  obedient  servants, 
William  Vincent  Allen,  Chairman.  Darrance  B.  Currier,  New  Hampshire. 

M.  W.  Howard,  Alabama.  John  W.  Hays,  New  Jersey. 

Homer  Prince,   Arkansas.  T.  E.  Lincoln,  New  York. 

T.  V.  Cator,  California.  Wm.  A.  Guthrie,  North  Carolina. 

Henry  C.  Balsinger,  Colorado.  O.  G.  Major,  North  Dakota. 

Joshua  Perkins,  Connecticut.  J.  C.  H.  Cobb,  Ohio. 

Chas.   Beadenkoph,  Delaware.  J.  W.  Marksbury,  Oregon. 

S.  S.  Harvey,  Florida.  Helen  S.  Johnson,  Pennsylvania. 

Guy  Clopton,  Georgia.  Jos.  Moore,  South  Carolina. 

Jas.  P.  Clough,  Idaho.  Joseph  B.  Moore,  South  Dakota. 


432  POPULIST  NOMINA  TION. 

A.  J.  Streater,  Illinois.  J.  H.  Burnham,  Tennessee. 

Seymore  Riddle,  Indiana.  J.  C.  Kearby,  Texas. 

W.  H.  Robb,  Iowa.  James  Hogan,  Utah. 

W.  A.  Harris,  Kansas.  Niles  E.  Baker,  Vermont. 

C.  E.  Lugg,  Kentucky.  Major  Mann  Page,  Virginia. 

J.  W.  Crawford,  Louisiana.  Mat.  Ward  Fitzgerald,  West  Virginia. 

L.  C.  Bateman,  Maine.  Campbell  W.  Bushnell,  Washington. 

Ira  L.  Guilford,  Maryland.  J.  W.  Vaughn,  Wisconsin. 

Conrad  Reno,  Massachusetts.  D.  H.  Davis,  Wyoming. 

D.  P.  Deming,  Michigan.  W.  O.  O'Neill,  Arizona. 

J.  M.  Bowler,  Minnesota.  J.  H.  Turner,  District  of  Columbia, 

John  A.  Bailey,  Mississippi.  M.  M.  Milligan,  New  Mexico. 

W.  R.  Littell,  Missouri.  Ralph  E.   Bray,   Oklahoma. 

W.  L.  Hewett,  Montana.  Dr.  J.  W.  Wharton,  Indian  Territory. 

J.   M.  McCormack,   Nevada. 

My  letter  of  acceptance  was  issued  shortly  afterward,  and  is  re- 
produced here: 

Letter  Accepting  Populist  Nomination, 

Lincoln,  Neb.,  October  3,  1896. 

Hon.  William  V.  Allen,  Chairman,  and  others,  members  of  the  Notification 
Committee  of  the  People's  Party — Gentlemen:  The  nomination  of  the  People's 
party  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States  has  been  tendered  me  in  such  a 
generous  spirit  and  upon  such  honorable  terms  that  I  am  able  to  accept  the 
same  without  departing  from  the  platform  adopted  by  the  Dmocratic  National 
Convention  at  Chicago. 

I  fully  appreciate  the  breadth  of  patriotism  which  has  actuated  the  mem- 
bers of  the  People's  party  who,  in  order  to  consolidate  the  sentiment  in  favor 
of  bimetallism,  have  been  willing  to  go  outside  of  party  lines  and  support  as 
their  candidate  one  already  nominated  by  the  Democratic  party  and  also  by  the 
Silver  party. 

I  also  appreciate  the  fact  that  while,  during  all  the  years  since  1873,  ^  large 
majority  of  the  Democratic  party  and  a  considerable  minority  of  the  Repub- 
lican party,  have  been  consistent  advocates  of  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  at  the 
present  ratio,  yet  ever  since  the  organization  of  the  People's  party  its  members 
have  unanimously  supported  such  coinage  as  the  only  means  of  restoring 
bimetallism.  By  persistently  pointing  out  the  disastrous  effects  of  a  gold  stand- 
ard and  protesting  against  each  successive  step  towards  financial  bondage,  the 
Populists  have  exerted  an  important  influence  in  awakening  the  public  to  a 
realization  of  the  Nation's  present  peril. 

In  a  time  like  this,  when  a  great  political  party  is  attempting  to  surrender 
the  right  of  the  American  people  to  legislate  for  themselves  upon  the  financial 
question,  and  is  seeking  to  bind  them  to  a  foreign  monetary  system,  it  behooves 
us  as  lovers  of  our  country  and  friends  of  American  institutions  to  lay  aside  for 
the  present  such  differences  as  may  exist  among  us  on  minor  questions,  in  order 
that  our  strength  may  be  united  in  a  supreme  effort  to  wrest  the  Government 
from  the  hands  of  those  who  imagine  that  the  nation's  finances  are  only  se- 


POPULIS  T  NOMINA  TION  433 

cured  when  controlled  by  a  few  financiers  and  that  national  honor  can  only  be 
maintained  by  servile  acquiescence  in  any  policy,  however  destructive  to  the 
interests  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  which  foreign  creditors,  present 
or  prospective,  may  desire  to  force  upon  us. 

It  is  a  cause  of  congratulation  that  we  have  in  this  campaign  not  only 
the  support  of  the  Democrats,  Populists  and  Republicans  who  have  all  along  be- 
lieved in  independent  bimetallism,  but  also  the  active  co-operation  of  those 
Democrats  and  Republicans  who,  having  heretofore  waited  for  international 
bimetallism,  now  join  with  us  rather  than  trust  the  destinies  of  the  nation  in 
the  hands  of  those  who  are  holding  out  the  delusive  hope  of  foreign  aid,  while 
they  labor  secretly  for  the  permanent  establishment  of  the  single  gold  standard. 

While  difficulties  always  arise  in  the  settlement  of  the  details  of  any  plan 
of  co-operation  between  distinct  political  organizations,  I  am  sure  that  the 
friends  who  are  working  towards  a  common  result  always  find  it  possible  to 
agree  upon  just  and  equitable  terms.  The  American  people  have  proven  equal 
to  every  emergency  which  has  arisen  in  the  past,  and  I  am  confident  that  in  the 
present  emergency  there  will  be  no  antagonism  between  the  various  divisions 
of  the  one  great  body  which  is  marching  to  repel  an  invasion  more  dangerous 
to  our  welfare  than  an  army  with  banners. 

Acknowledging  with  gratitude  your  expressions  of  confidence  and  good 
esteem,  I  remain.  Very  truly  yours, 

W.  J.  BRYAN. 

Senator  Butler  delivered  the  notification  to  Mr.  Watson,  the  Pop- 
ulist candidate  for  the  Vice-Presidency. 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 


I 


MR.  SEWALL'S  SPEECH  AND  LETTER. 

GIVE  below  the  speech  deUvered  by  Mr.  Sewall  at  the  notification 
meeting  at  Madison  Square  Garden  and  his  letter  of  accept- 
ance, which  was  pubHshed  some,  weeks  later. 


Mr.  Sewall's  Speech  at  Madison  Sqttare  Garden. 

Mr.  Chairman  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Committee:  You  have  given  me 
official  notice  of  my  selection  by  the  Democratic  National  Convention  as  its 
candidate  for  Vice-President. 

For  the  courteous  terms  of  your  message  and  the  kind  personal  expressions 
I  thank  you. 

Having  been  present  at  that  great  convention  I  can  more  truly  estimate  the 
honor  its  action  has  conferred. 

It  was  the  greatest  and  most  earnest  convention  in  the  history  of  our  party. 
It  was  closer  and  more  in  touch  with  the  people.  The  delegates  were  there  to 
voice  the  sentiments  of  their  constituents,  the  people  of  the  party,  for  the  people 
of  the  party  controlled  and  conducted  that  convention. 

The  Democracy  of  the  country  realize  that  all  the  great  principles  of  our 
party  are  as  potent  and  essential  to  the  well-being  of  the  country  today  as  they 
have  always  been,  and  as  they  ever  will  be,  but  the  overshadowing  issues  before 
the  country  now,  made  dominant  by  the  distressed  condition  prevailing 
throughout  our  land,  is  the  demand  for  reform  in  our  existing  monetary  system. 

Our  party  and,  we  believe,  a  great  majority  of  the  American  people,  are 
convinced  that  the  legislation  of  '73  demonetizing  silver  was  a  wrong  inflicted 
upon  our  country  which  should  and  must  be  righted. 

We  believe  that  the  single  gold  standard  has  so  narrowed  the  base  of  our 
monetary  structure  that  it  is  unstable  and  unsafe,  and  so  dwarfed  it,  in  its 
development  and  in  its  power  to  furnish  the  necessary  financial  blood  to  the 
nation,  that  commercial  and  industrial  paralysis  has  followed. 

We  believe  that  we  need  and  must  have  the  broad  and  expanding  foundation 
of  both  gold  and  silver  to  support  a  monetary  system  strong  and  stable,  capable 
of  meeting  the  demand  of  a  growing  country  and  an  industrious,  energetic,  and 
enterprising  people;  a  system  that  will  not  be  weakened  and  panic  stricken  by 
every  foreign  draft  upon  us;  a  system  that  will  maintain  a  parity  of  just  values 
and  the  nation's  money,  and  protect  us  from  the  frequent  fluctuations  of  today, 
so  disastrous  to  every  business  and  industry  of  the  land. 

We  demand  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  the  opening  of  our  mints  to  both 
money  metals  without  discrimination,  the  return  to  the  money  of  our  fathers, 
the  money  of  the  Constitution,  gold  and  silver. 

434 


Apr^ 


/kyihn^^ 


^^VL<rr<fy^<9-''^-^ ' 


MR.  SEV/ALL'S  SPEECH  AND  LETTER.  437 

We  believe  this  is  the  remedy  and  the  only  remedy  for  the  evil  from  which 
we  are  now  suffering — the  evil  that  is  now  so  fast  devastating  and  impoverish- 
ing our  land  and  people,  bringing  poverty  to  our  homes  and  bankruptcy  to 
our  business,  which,  if  allowed  to  continue,  will  grow  until  our  very  in- 
stitutions are  threatened. 

The  demonetization  of  silver  has  thrown  the  whole  primary  money  func- 
tion on  gold,  appreciating  its  value  and  purchasing  power.  Restore  the  money 
function  to  silver  and  silver  will  appreciate  and  its  purchasing  power  increase. 
Take  from  gold  its  monopoly,  its  value  will  be  reduced  and  in  due  course  the 
parity  of  the  two  metals  will  again  obtain  under  natural  causes. 

We  shall  then  have  a  broad  and  unlimited  foundation  for  a  monetary 
system,  commensurate  with  our  country's  needs  and  future  development,  not 
the  unsafe  basis  of  today  reduced  by  half  by  the  removal  of  silver  and  con- 
tinually undermined  by  foreigners  carrying  from  us  our  gold. 

This  is  the  reform  to  which  we  are  pledged,  the  reform  the  people  demand, 
the  return  to  the  monetary  system  of  over  eighty  years  of  our  national  existence. 

The  Democratic  party  has  already  given  its  approval  and  its  pledge.  Our 
opponents  admit  the  wisdom  of  the  principle  for  which  we  contend,  but  ask 
us  to  await  permission  and  co-operation  of  other  nations. 

Our  people  will  not  wait.  They  will  not  ask  permission  of  any  nation  on 
earth  to  relieve  themselves  of  the  cause  of  their  distress.  The  issue  has  been 
made.    The  people  stand  ready  to  render  their  verdict  next  November. 

Mr.  Chairman,  unequivocally  and  through  sincere  conviction,  I  indorse  the 
platform  on  which  I  have  been  nominated. 

I  believe  we  are  right;  the  people  are  with  us  and  what  the  people  declare 
is  always  right  and  must  prevail. 

I  accept  the  nomination,  and,  with  the  people's  confirmation,  every  effort 
of  which  God  shall  render  me  capable  will  be  exerted  in  support  of  the  prin- 
ciples involved. 

Mr.  Sewall's  Letter  Accepting  Democratic  Nomination. 

Bath,  Me.,  Oct.  6,  1896. 
Hon  Stephen  M.  White,  Chairman,  and  Members  of  the  Notification  Com- 
mittee. 

Gentlemen:  I  have  the  honor  to  accept  in  writing,  as  I  have  already 
verbally  done,  the  nomination  tendered  by  you  on  behalf  of  the  Democratic 
party  as  its  candidate  for  Vice-President  of  the  United  States. 

And  in  so  doing  I  am  glad  first  to  express  my  satisfaction  that  the  plat- 
form of  our  party,  which  has  commanded  my  lifelong  allegiance,  is  honestly 
and  fully  declaratory  of  all  its  principles  and  especially  of  the  absorbing 
financial  issue  upon  which,  as  you  say,  I  took  my  stand,  "When  the  hours 
of  triumph  seemed  remote,  and  when  arcogant  money  changers  throughout 
the  world  boasted  that  the  conquest  of  the  American  masses  was  complete." 

These  principles  have  been  of  late  in  abeyance,  but  only  because  those 
whom  we  trusted  *^o  maintain  them  have  failed  to  do  so;  these  principles 
can  never  die. 

We  have  rescued  our  party  from  those  who,  under  the  influence  of  the 
money  power,  have  controlled  and  debased  it.  Our  mission  now  is  to  rescue 
from  this  same  power,  and  its  foreign  allies,  our  own  beloved  country. 

2S 


438  MR.  SEWALL'S  SPEECH  AND  LETTER. 

This  is  the  first  and  highest  duty  imposed  by  our  party's  platform.  Upon 
the  performance  of  this  duty    all  other  reforms  must  wait. 

The  test  of  party  principles  is  the  government  they  assure.  The  proof 
of  good  government  is  a  contented  and  happy  people,  and  the  supreme  test 
of  both  is  the  ability  to  guide  the  country  through  crises  as  well  as  to  admin- 
ister the  government  in  ordinary  times. 

Our  people  now  face  a  crisis;  a  crisis  more  serious  than  any  since  the  war. 
To  what  party  shall  they  turn  in  their  dire  emergency?  It  is  true  that  the 
present  crisis  may  not  involve  all  equally — that  there  are  those  who  do  not 
suffer  now,  who  may  not  suffer  should  the  crisis  threatened  by  the  gold 
standard  come  on  in  all  its  fury.  Human  selfishness  makes  these  deaf  to  all 
appeals.  But  to  these,  fortunately,  the  Democratic  party  has  never  needed 
to  appeal  to  win  its  battles,  nor  does  it  now,  save  as  there  are  some  among 
them  who  can  rise  superior  to  self  in  the  sacrifice  which  such  a  crisis  demands 
of  every  patriot. 

We  are  told  that  the  country  has  prospered  under  the  present  monetary 
standard — that  its  wealth  has  enormously  increased.  Granted,  but  in  whose 
hands?  In  the  hands  of  the  toilers,  the  producers,  the  farmers,  the  miners, 
the  fabricators  in  the  factories,  the  creators  of  the  nation's  wealth  in  peace, 
its  defenders  in  war?  Have  they  the  prosperity  which  was  theirs  so  late  as 
even  twenty  years  ago?  I  deny  it.  They  deny  it.  None  affirm  it,  save  those 
whose  interest  it  is  to  do  so — whose  profits  would  diminish  as  prosperity  re- 
turns to  those  off  whose  distress  they  thrive. 

All  is  indeed  right  between  capital  and  capital.  The  "best  money  in  the 
world"  is  none  too  good  for  those  who  have  got  it,  but  how  is  it  with  the 
90  per  cent,  of  our  people  who  have  "got  it  to  get?" 

How  is  it  with  those  who  must  buy  this  "best  money  in  the  world"  with 
the  products  of  their  own  labor?  These  are  the  people  for  whom  the 
Democratic  party  would  legislate.  What  is  the  best  money  for  these,  is 
the  question  for  all  to  ask  who  really  love  this  land. 

How  else  can  you  increase  labor's  purchasing  power  but  by  increasing 
the  price  of  labor's  products? 

Is  it  a  fair  measure  of  values  that,  in  our  great  producing  section,  ten 
bushels  of  potatoes  must  be  paid  for  a  dollar — ten  bushels  of  oats  for  a  dollar 
— six  bushels  of  corn  for  a  dollar — three  bushels  of  wheat,  and  all  other  prod- 
ucts of  the  soil,  and  mines,  and  the  labor  of  all  wage  earners  at  the  same 
ratio?  Does  agy  fair  mind  say  this  is  honest  money  that  forces  such  an 
exchange,  and,  if  it  is  not  a  fair  exchange,  is  it  honest,  is  it  less  than  robbery? 

This  is  the  condition  to  which  the  single  gold  standard  has  brought  us. 

Under  it,  the  appreciation  of  the  "best  money  in  the  world"  has  in- 
creased the  wealth  of  the  rich,  and  for  the  same  reason  has  increased  the 
debt  of  the  debtor.  So  it  has  been,  so  under  the  present  standard  it  must  con- 
tinue to  be. 

With  these  object  lessons  about  us,  little  need  have  we  for  history  and 
statistics,  and  the  studies  of  scholars.  Little  satisfaction  it  is  to  us  that  they 
have  warned  us  long  since  of  the  deadly  evil  of  the  gold  standard. 

It  has  brought  us  at  last  to  the  parting  of  the  ways.  Whither  shall  the 
people  go,   in  the  way  that  has  led  to  their  enslavement,   or  in   that  which 


MR.  SEWALL'S  SPEECH  AND  LETTER.  43$ 

offers  them  their  only  chance  to  regain  individual  liberty,  lasting  prosperity 
and  happiness? 

Let  not  our  opponents  charge  us  with  creating  class  distinctions.  Alas 
for  the  Republic,  they  are  already  here,  created  by  the  Republican  policy  of  the 
last  thirty  years,  created  by  the  very  system  we  would  now  overthrow  and 
destroy. 

Nor  do  we  raise  a  sectional  issue. 

The  nomination  you  tender  repels  the  charge.  None  know  better  than 
I  that  this  nomination  is  meant  as  no  personal  tribute,  but  as  an  assurance 
that  our  party  is  a  non-sectional  party.  Not  by  our  policy,  but  only  by  ihe 
continuance  of  the  gold  standard  can  sectionalism  be  revived. 

Neither  shall  our  opponents  be  permitted  to  terrify  the  people  by  predic- 
tions that  temporary  disturbance  or  panic  will  come  from  the  policy  we 
propose.  The  American  people  will  be  loyal  to  the  natioft's  money,  will  stand 
behind  it  and  maintain  it  at  whatever  value  they  themselves  may  put  upon  it. 

Once  before,  in  the  present  generation,  have  our  people  been  called  upon  to 
face  a  momentous  crisis.  What  then  said  Mr.  Lincoln,  the  chosen  leader 
of  the  plain  people  of  the  land?  Was  he  awed  by  threats  or  weakened  by  the 
wily  persuasions  of  those  false  friends,  who,  as  today,  pleaded  for  compromise 
with  wrong?    His  answer  was: 

If  our  sense  of  duty  forbids  this,  then  let  us  stand  by  our  duty  fearlessly  and 
effectively.  Let  us  be  diverted  by  none  of  those  sophistical  contrivances  wherewith  we 
are  so  industriously  plied  and  belabored,  contrivances  such  as  groping  for  some  mid- 
dle ground  between  the  right  and  the  wrong.  •  *  •  Reversing  the  divine  rule,  and 
calling  not  the  sinners,  but  the  righteous  to  repentance,  such  as  invocations  to  Washington, 
imploring  men  to  unsay  what  Washington  said,  and  undo  what  Washington  did.    •     •     • 

Neither  let  us  be  slandered  from  our  duty  by  false  accusations  against  us.  Let 
us  have  faith  that  right  makes  might,  and  in  that  faith  let  us  to  the  end  dare  to  do 
our  duty  as  we  understand  It. 

We  know  well  the  nature  of  the  struggle  in  which  we  are  engaged.  We 
are  anxious  only  that  the  people  of  the  land  shall  understand  it,  and  then 
our  battle  is  won. 

Behind  the  strong  entrenchment  of  the  gold  standard  are  gathered  all 
those  favored  classes  it  has  fostered — the  only  "dangerous  classes"  of  the 
land.  Avarice  and  unholy  greed  are  there,  every  trust  and  combination  is 
there,  every  monopoly  is  there,  led  by  the  greatest  monopoly  of  all,  the 
monopoly  of  the  power  of  gold. 

With  us  in  our  assault  upoa  these  entrenchments  are  all  those  unselfish 
men,  who,  not  now  suffering  themselves,  cannot  rest  content  with  conditions 
so  full  of  suffering  for  others,  and  that  vaster  number  of  our  people  who 
have  been  sacrificed  to  the  small  and  selfish  class  who  now  resist  their  at- 
tempts to  regain  their  ancient  rights  and  liberties. 

These  are  the  patriots  of  1896 — the  foes  of  a  "dishonest  dollar"  which 
enriches  10  per  cent,  of  our  people  to  rob  the  rest — the  defenders  of  the  homes 
of  the  land,  of  public  morals  and  the  public  faith,  both  of  which  alike  forbid 
the  payment  of  government  obligations  in  a  coin  costlier  to  those  who  have  to 
pay  than  that  the  contract  calls  for — the  defenders  of  the  honor  of  the  nation 
whosp  most  sacred  charge  it  is  to  care  for  the  welfare  of  all  its  citizens. 


440 


MR.  SEWALL'S  SPEECH  AND  LETTER. 


The  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  is  the  sole  remedy  by  which  to 
check  the  wrongs  of  today — to  undo  the  ruin  of  the  past. 

And  for  our  inspiration  we  have  the  justice  of  our  cause,  and  those 
cherished  principles  of  Jefferson  and  Jackson  which  shall  be  our  guide  on  our 
return  to  power: 

Equal  and  exact  justice  to  all  men. 

Absolute  acquiescence  in  decisions  of  the  majority,  the  vital  principle  of  republics. 

The  honest  payment  of  our  debts  and  sacred  preservation  of  the  public  faith. 

Profoundly  sensible  of  the  high  honor  of  the  nomination  you  tender, 
I  am.  Truly  yours, 

ARTHUR  SEWALL. 

Mr.  Sewall  accompanied  me  on  my  trip  through  New  England, 
speaking  briefly  at  the  meeting  on  Boston  Common  and  at  a  few 
other  places.  While  not  much  accustomed  to  public  speaking,  he 
always  expressed  himself  forcibly  and  in  well  chosen  language. 

He  fully  approved  of  the  division  of  the  electors  with  the  Populists 
and  throughout  the  campaign  gave  to  the  Democratic  committee  the 
benefit  of  his  long  experience  in  politics. 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 


THIRD  TRIP  COMMENCES. 

AFTER  three  days'  sojourn  at  home,  the  long  trip  of  the  cam- 
paign was  begun.  Mrs.  Bryan  did  not  accompany  me  this 
time,  but  met  me  about  a  month  later  at  St.  Paul.  I  had  found 
her  a  great  aid  in  my  travels  because  she  could  assist  in  meeting  the  re- 
ception committees,  and  thus  give  me  more  rest  between  stations.  And 
then,  too,  she  was  able  to  insist  upon  more  reasonable  hours  and  greater 
freedom  from  interruption  than  I  was  able  to  do.  At  this  time,  how- 
ever, the  children  were  entering  school  for  the  fall  and  she  remained 
to  see  them  through  the  first  few  weeks  of  the  term. 

I  found  the  Bryan  Home  Guards  in  uniform  ready  to  accompany 
me  to  the  train  on  Friday  night,  and  a  number  of  citizens  assembled 
at  the  depot.  In  reply  to  a  call  for  a  speech,  I  told  them  that  I 
was  leaving  Nebraska  because  I  felt  sure  of  that  State,  and  was  going 
into  a  part  of  the  country  where  work  was  more  needed. 

The  labors  of  a  public  speaker  are  often  enlivened  by  witty  re- 
marks from  persons  in  the  audience.  These  interjections  sometimes 
embarrass  and  sometimes  aid  the  speaker.  I  remember  that  on  this  oc- 
casion when  I  declared  that  the  silver  cause  was  growing  and  that  each 
day  found  more  bimetallists  than  there  were  the  day  before, 
some  one  in  the  crowd  promptly  shouted,  "Hurrah  for  tomorrow!" — a 
sentiment  which  seemed  to  find  a  response  in  every  heart. 

The  people  had  gathered  at  stations  along  the  way,  and  I  noticed 
that  in  my  own  district  nearly  all  of  them  addressed  me  as  "Billy,"  a 
name  seldom  applied  to  me  until  after  I  entered  politics  and  then,  at 
first,  by  the  Republicans.  Sometimes  for  sake  of  euphony  an  "O"  was 
attached  to  my  surname. 

The  largest  audience  was  assembled  at  Nebraska  City,  the  home 
of  Hon.  J.  Sterling  Morton,  Secretary  of  Agriculture,  where  the  train 
stopped  for  a  few  moments. 

I  found  that  the  newspaper  men  always  counseled  retirement  at 
an  early  hour,  though  I  sometimes  suspected  that  their  interest  in  my 
•health  was  somewhat  sharpened  by  the  fact  that  they  had  to  send 
their  dispatches  after  I  went  to  bed.  While  I  desired  to  accommodate 
them,  my  good  intentions  were  sometimes  thwarted  by  the  presence  of 

441 


442  THIRD  TRIP  COMMENCES. 

an  enthusiastic  crowd,  which  insisted  on  some  word  of  greeting.  After 
all  had  turned  in  for  the  night  the  glare  of  torch-lights  and  a  shout, 
increasing  as  we  approached  and  dying  out  as  we  departed,  notified 
us  of  gatherings  along  the  line  even  where  the  train  did  not  stop. 
On  this  trip  we  were  awakened  at  Auburn,  the  county  seat  of  Nemaha, 
always  a  faithful  supporter  in  my  Congressional  contests,  by  a  few 
hundred  silverites  who  insisted  on  shaking  hands  through  the  window. 

We  arrived  at  Kansas  City  on  Saturday  morning  and  were  met 
by  Governor  Stone,  Hon.  Lon  V.  Stevens,  Democratic  candidate  for 
Governor,  Hon.  Sam  B.  Cook,  chairman  of  the  State  committee,  Hon. 
John  I.  Martin,  of  St.  Louis,  sergeant-at-arms  of  the  Democratic 
National  Convention,  Col.  M.  C.  Wetmore,  of  St.  Louis,  Chief-of- 
Police  Irwin,  of  Kansas  City,  and  others. 

Before  leaving  the  car  I  spoke  to  the  laboring  men  who  were  on 
their  way  to  the  packing  houses,  and  took  occasion  to  comment  upon 
Mr.  McKinley's  remark  that  the  mills  rather  than  the  mints  should 
be  opened.    The  following  is  an  extract: 

Kansas  City  Speech. 

Some  of  our  opponents  tell  us  that  we  should  open  the  mills  instead  of  the 
mints.  That  reminds  me  of  the  man  who  said  that  his  horse  would  go  well 
enough  if  he  could  only  get  the  wagon  started.  It  is,  so  to  speak,  putting  the 
cart  before  the  horse.  Of  what  use  are  mills  unless  the  people  can  buy  what  the 
mills  produce?  And  how  can  the  mills  be  operated  so  long  as  those  who  pro- 
duce the  wealth  of  the  country,  particularly  the  farmers,  are  not  able  to  make 
enough  out  of  their  products  to  pay  taxes  and  interest?  There  is  no  more 
effective  way  to  destroy  the  market  for  the  products  of  the  mills  than  to  lower 
the  price  of  the  farmer's  crops.  You  gentlemen  who  live  in  this  city,  sur- 
rounded by  an  agricultural  country,  know  that  there  is  no  way  of  bringing 
prosperity  to  Kansas  City  until  you  first  bring  prosperity  to  those  toilers  upon 
whose  welfare  Kansas  City  rests.  It  does  not  require  financiers,  nor  does  it 
require  railroad  attorneys,  to  tell  you  where  your  prosperity  lies;  nor  can  these 
men  prevent  your  exercising  the  right  of  sovereign  voters. 

I  met  a  railroad  man  yesterday  who  told  me  that  while  he  did  not  agree 
with  me  on  the  silver  question,  he  thought  an  issue  had  been  raised  which 
was  greater  than  the  silver  question,  namely,  whether  he  lived  in  a  republic 
where  a  man  had  a  right  to  vote  as  he  pleased,  or  whether  his  vote  was  the 
property  of  somebody  else  to  be  used  as  somebody  else  pleased. 

After  breakfast  the  party  took  a  tally-ho  coach  and  attended  a 
meeting  held  at  the  intersection  of  two  of  the  principal  streets. 

From  Kansas  City  we  proceeded  to  St.  Loiiis,  stopping  at  Carroll- 
ton,  Brunswick,  Moberly,  Centralia,  Mexico  and  other  places. 

A  congenial  spirit,  Hon.  Champ  Clark,  ex-Congressman  and  Con- 
gressman-elect from  the  Bowling  Green  district,  met  us  en  route. 


THIRD  TRIP  COMMENCES.  443 

One  of  our  party  succeeded  in  capturing  a  pickpocket  at  one  of 
the  stations  along  the  Hne.  We  were  so  annoyed  by  the  presence  of 
the  Hght-fingered  gentry  that  during  the  latter  part  of  the  campaign 
the  National  Committee  supplied  our  train  with  a  special  detective  who, 
within  a  month  caused  the  arrest  of  more  than  forty  professionals. 

At  St.  Louis  our  party  was  met  by  a  reception  committee,  among 
whom  I  recognized  Col.  Charles  H.  Jones,  whose  paper,  the  Post- 
Dispatch,  did  such  excellent  service,  both  prior  to  the  convention  and 
during  the  campaign,  Col.  Nicholas  Bell,  and  Hon.  George  W.  Allen. 
There  were  three  meetings  in  St.  Louis  that  evening,  the  first  was 
held  at  Concordia  Park,  where,  at  the  close  of  the  speech,  a  silver 
horseshoe  was  presented  by  representatives  of  the  Horseshoers'  As- 
sociation. In  expressing  my  appreciation  of  the  gift,  I  promised  that, 
if  elected,  I  would  hang  it  above  one  of  the  doors  of  the  White  House, 
and  added  that  I  had  so  much  faith  in  the  merits  of  bimetallism  that 
I  believed  that  the  people,  when  once  more  in  the  enjoyment  of 
its  blessing,  would,  paraphrasing  the  language  of  the  poet,  say  to  my 

successor: 

"And  now,  my  friend,  I  give  you  timely  warning, 
Never  take  that  horseshoe  from  the  door." 

The  second  meeting  was  held  in  the  convention  hall.  A  day  or  two 
before  this  meeting  a  number  of  the  banks  of  St.  Louis  had  joined 
in  a  public  letter,  announcing  that  they  could  not  furnish  gold  to 
their  customers,  but  expressing  the  belief  that  they  would  be  able 
to  do  so  within  a  few  days  after  a  "correct  settlement"  of  the  money 
question  had  been  secured.  I  took  occasion  to  refer  to  this  notice, 
pointing  out  that,  in  speaking  of  a  "correct  settlement,"  the  signers 
had  indulged  in  the  ambiguity  usual  among  advocates  of  the  gold 
standard,  and  suggesting  that  a  money,  which,  like  gold,  disappeared 
as  soon  as  any  one  attempted  to  discuss  the  financial  question,  could 
not  be  relied  upon  to  furnish  our  only  standard  money. 

The  third  meeting  of  the  evening  was  held  at  Sportman's  Park, 
where  an  immense  crowd,  one  of  the  largest  of  the  campaign,  had 
assembled.  The  falling  of  the  platform  here  prevented  any  extended 
speech.  Among  other  old  acquaintances  met  at  this  meeting,  I 
recall  Plon.  John  J.  O'Neill,  a  colleague  in  Congress.  He  is  a 
good  story  teller,  and  gave  me  two  new  stories  on  this  occasion.  He 
said  that  some  of  the  Democrats  who  left  the  party  immediately  after 
the  Chicago  convention  were  now  coming  back,  and  that  they  did  not 
feel  very  kindly  disposed  toward  the  leaders  who  had  induced  them 
to  go  out,  and  added  that  it  reminded  him  of  the  experience  of  a 


444  THIRD  TRIP  COMMENCES. 

traveler  on  a  steamboat.  As  the  boat  approached  the  shore,  some 
one  called  out  "Jump,"  and  the  hero  of  the  story  jumped,  but  found 
that  instead  of  reaching  the  shore  he  alighted  in  mud  and  water  up 
to  his  neck.  With  a  look  upon  his  face  which  gave  emphasis  to  his 
words,  he  demanded  to  know  the  name  of  the  man  who  said  '']\xm^" 

He  illustrated  another  feature  of  the  campaign.  He  had  re- 
cently met  a  Republican  who  gave  as  his  reason  for  leaving  the 
Republican  party  that  too  many  corporation  Democrats  were  going 
into  it.  Mr.  O'Neill  said  it  reminded  him  of  an  Irishman  who  was 
driving  a  mule.  When  the  animal  became  unruly  and  got  one  of 
its  hind  feet  over  the  dashboard,  the  occupant  of  the  buggy  re- 
marked to  the  mule:  "All  right.  You  can  get  in  here  if  you  like, 
but  if  you  are  going  to  get  in  here,  I'll  get  out." 

Saturday  was  a  long  day  and  I  was  ready  for  a  Sabbath's  rest. 
After  attending  morning  service  with  Hon.  John  I.  Martin,  I  dined 
with  some  relatives  and  then  remained  at  the  Planters'  until  evening, 
when  our  party  crossed  the  river  and  spent  the  night  in  the  special  car 
which  was  waiting  to  take  us  to  Kentucky.  The  car  was  side-tracked 
near  the  river,  and  the  night  is  remembered  because  of  a  very  suc- 
cessful attack  made  upon  our  party  by  the  mosquitoes.  I  was  afterward 
relating  my  experience  to  Congressman  John  Allen,  of  Mississippi, 
who  always  has  a  story  appropriate  for  the  occasion,  and  he  told  me 
how  an  inhabitant  of  the  swamps  of  the  lower  Mississippi  used  to 
protect  himself  from  such  annoyances.  He  said  that  by  night  the 
man  was  so  drunk  that  he  did  not  know  that  the  mosquitoes  were 
biting  him,  and  that  by  morning  the  mosquitoes  were  so  drunk  that 
they  did  not  care  to  bite  any  more. 


CHAPTER  XXXIII. 


M 


IN  THE  SOUTH. 

ONDAY  was  another  busy  day.  Leaving  East  St.  Louis  early 
in  the  morning  I  spoke,  among  other  places,  at  Belleville, 
Nashville,  Mt.  Vernon,  McLeansboro  and  Carmi,  all  in 
Illinois,  at  Mt.  Vernon  and  Evansville,  in  Indiana,  and  at  Henderson, 
Owensboro,  Hawesville  and  Louisville,  in  Kentucky.  Hon.  W.  H. 
Cantrell,  of  Chicago,  and  Hon.  A.  G.  Bentley,  of  Pike  county,  were 
in  charge  of  the  train  through  Illinois,  while  Hon.  Urey  Woodson, 
of  Owensboro,  Ky.,  National  Committeeman,  and  Hon.  H.  A.  Som- 
mers,  of  Elizabethtown,  Ky.,  chairman  of  the  State  committee,  were  in 
charge  in  Kentucky.  The  Evansville  meeting  was  presided  over  by 
Hon.  J.  G.  Shanklin,  the  veteran  editor  and  silver  advocate. 

We  entered  the  Southern  States  at  Henderson,  and  were  accorded 
a  welcome  which  left  nothing  to  be  desired.  In  fact,  the  entire  jour- 
ney through  Kentucky  impressed  me  with  the  belief  that  the  elec- 
toral vote  of  the  State  was  safe  beyond  a  peradventure.  At  Owens- 
boro I  met  Hon.  William  T,  Ellis,  with  whom  I  served  in  the  House 
of  Representatives,  and  others  whose  acquaintance  I  had  formed  when 
I  visited  Owensboro  more  than  a  year  before. 

Three  meetings  were  held  at  Louisville,  the  first  one  at  Phoenix 
Hill  Park,  the  second  at  the  Haymarket,  and  the  third  in  front  of 
the  Willard  Hotel.    The  following  extract  is  from  the  first  speech: 

Louisville  Speech. 
As  the  regular  nominee  of  the  Democratic  party  I  might  appeal  to  you 
on  the  ground  of  the  regularity  of  my  nomination.  I  might  call  your  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  the  Chicago  convention  was  regularly  called  by  the  regu- 
lar authority;  that  all  over  this  Union  Democrats  assembled  in  the  regular  way 
to  select  their  delegates  to  that  convention.  I  might  call  your  attention  to  the 
fact  that  no  convention  ever  held  in  this  country  more  accurately  reflected 
the  sentiment  of  the  party  which  elected  the  delegates  than  did  the  Chicago 
convention.  In  no  convention  within  this  generation  have  the  voters  them- 
selves taken  so  active  and  so  influential  a  part  as  the  voters  of  the  Democratic 
party  took  in  the  Chicago  convention.  If  you  have  regard  for  the  will  of  the 
majority  of  the  party,  regularly  expressed,  then,  my  friends,  I  can  appeal  to  you 
on  the  ground  that  I  am  the  regular  nominee  of  the  Democratic  party.  But  I 
shall  appeal   for  your   support  on   higher   grounds   than   party   regularity.    I 

445 


446  IN  THE  SOUTH. 

expressly  release,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  from  the  support  of  the  Chicago 
ticket  every  Democrat  who  believes  that  the  success  of  that  ticket  will  imperil 
the  country.  I  shall  ask  no  man  to  violate  his  judgment  or  be  deaf  to  the  voice 
of  his  conscience.  I  shall  ask  no  one  to  place  fealty  to  party  above  love  of 
country.  I  would  not  do  so  myself;  I  shall  ask  no  one  to  do  what  I  would  not 
be  willing  to  do.  I  believe,  my  friends,  that  the  Chicago  platform  resents  the 
policies  which  will  be  best  for  the  people  of  this  country;  I  believe  that  these 
policies,  crystallized  into  law,  will  bring  blessings  to  the  American  people,  and  I 
call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  in  this  campaign  the  lines  are 
drawn  between  Plutocracy  and  Democracy.  In  such  a  fight  there  is  no 
middle  ground;  those  who  are  not  for  us  are  against  us.  More  than  that, 
I  beg  you  to  remember  that  the  ballot  is  not  given  to  the  individual  as  a 
matter  of  personal  compliment.  It  is  given  to  him  as  a  sacred  trust  to  be 
used  as  he  thinks  best,  for  the  protection  of  himself,  for  the  advancement  of 
the  welfare  of  his  fellows,  and  for  the  good  of  his  country;  and  no  man  has  a 
right  to  throw  that  ballot  away  in  time  of  danger.  The  Bible  tells  us  of  the 
man  who  hid  his  talents  in  the  earth,  and  we  read  that  he  was  condemned. 
Why?  Because  he  neglected  to  improve  his  opportunities.  I  say  to  you,  my 
friends,  that  in  a  campaign  like  this,  where  the  syndicates,  the  trusts,  and  the 
"combinations  of  money  grabbers  in  this  country  and  Europe"  are  on  one  side, 
and  the  "struggling  masses"  on  the  other,  no  man  has  a  right  to  throw  away  his 
ballot.  If  you  think  that  the  success  of  the  Chicago  ticket  would  be  an  injury 
to  this  country,  you  ought  to  vote  the  Republican  ticket  and  save  your  country 
from  distress.  If  you  think  that  the  election  of  the  Republican  ticket  would  be 
a  bad  thing  for  the  country,  then  you  ought  to  vote  for  the  Chicago  ticket  and 
save  your  country  from  distress. 

The  Chicago  platform  does  not  present  new  doctrines;  it  presents  to  the 
American  people  the  principles  and  policies  which  have  received  the  support 
of  the  leaders  of  the  Democratic  party  from  the  beginning  down  to  this  time. 
Now  living  Republicans  seem  to  have  more  influence  with  some  of  our  Demo- 
cratic leaders  than  do  the  dead  Democrats  of  the  past. 

Our  platform  declares  against  the  issue  of  bonds  in  time  of  peace,  and 
against  trafficking  with  the  syndicates,  which,  for  the  last  few  years,  have  been 
saving  our  country,  at  so  much  per  save.  Let  me  quote  to  you  what  a  citizen 
of  your  own  State  once  said  upon  this  subject.  Hon.  John  G.  Carlisle,  in  1878, 
used  the  words  which  I  am  about  to  read  to  you.    He  said: 

"The  struggle  now  going  on  cannot  cease,  and  ought  not  to  cease  until 
all  the  industrial  interests  of  this  country  are  fully  and  finally  emancipated 
from  the  heartless  domination  of  syndicates,  stock  exchanges,  and  other  great 
combinations  of  money  grabbers  in  this  country  and  Europe." 

That,  my  friends,  is  the  language  used  by  Mr.  Carlisle  in  1878.  I  repeat 
that  language  now,  and  if  I  am  wrong  I  have  seven  years  to  find  out  my  mis- 
take before  I  am  as  old  as  he  was  when  he  used  the  words.  Has  that  heartless 
domination  ceased?  No.  Instead  of  having  ceased,  it  has  grown  more  heart- 
less every  year.  Have  the  industrial  classes  been  fully  and  finally  emancipated? 
No.  In  this  campaign  they  intend  to  rivet  permanently  upon  the  industrial 
classes  the  shackles  which  they  have  been  preparing  for  twenty  years.  This 
speecli  from  which  I  read  denounced  the  syndicates.     The  Democratic  party 


IN  THE  SOUTH.  447 

denounces  those  syndicates  today,  and  I  thank  God  that  the  party  has  driven 
out  of  its  ranks  the  representatives  of  those  syndicates.  Mr.  Carlisle's  speech 
denounced  the  stock  exchanges,  and  I  rejoice  that  the  stock  exchanges  are 
against  us  in  the  fight  which  we  are  making,  because  their  opposition  gives 
assurance  that  we  are  doing  our  duty  to  our  country.  That  speech  denounced 
the  great  combinations  of  money  grabbers  in  this  country  and  Europe.  I 
denounce  the  Rothschild  contract  entered  into  by  the  present  administration 
as  the  most  infamous  contract  ever  entered  into  by  the  United  States  with  a 
private  individual.  I  call  it  infamous,  not  so  much  because  of  the  amount  of 
money  made  by  the  syndicate,  but  because  the  Government  in  that  contract 
bought  the  good  will  of  two  banking  firms.  Has  it  come  to  this,  that  seventy 
millions  of  people  must  purchase  their  right  to  exist  from  "the  combinations 
of  money  grabbers  in  this  country  and  Europe"? 

Speaking  of  newspaper  opposition,  I  said: 

We  do  not  have  all  the  newspapers  with  us  in  this  fight,  but  an  editor  only 
votes  once,  and  I  have  known  some  editors  who  have  had  so  little  influence  that 
they  could  not  even  control  the  one  vote  which  the  law  gave  them.  We  would 
be  glad  to  have  the  newspapers  with  us,  but  while  we  would  like  to  have  the 
newspapers  with  us,  we  would  far  rather  have  the  people  with  us  at  the  polls 
than  to  have  the  support  of  all  the  newspapers.  We  would  like  to  have  the 
newspapers  with  us  because  we  hate  to  have  our  people  get  mad  every  morning 
when  they  read  them.  I  do  not  know  of  any  one  thing  which  causes  so  many 
people  to  forget  their  resolution  not  to  swear  again  as  the  gold  standard  edi- 
torials which  appear  from  day  to  day.  Our  opponents  say  that  the  advocates 
of  free  coinage  do  not  think;  that  is  too  bad.  I  am  sure  that  if  the  Creator 
had  had  the  same  opinion  of  the  majority  of  the  people  that  the  average  advo- 
cate of  the  gold  standard  has.  He  would  not  have  wasted  time  giving  brains  to 
the  people  in  general.  He  would  have  given  a  larger  share  to  those  who 
were  predestined  to  write  gold  standard  editorials,  and  then  He  would  have 
given  to  all  of  the  rest  of  the  people  backs  strong  enough  to  bear  the  increasing 
load  which  the  gold  standard  editors  would  place  upon  them.  They  say  that 
the  advocates  of  free  coinage  do  not  think.  I  affirm  that  the  advocates  of  free 
coinage  are  the  only  people  who,  in  this  campaign,  apply  natural  laws  to  the 
money  question  and  carry  into  the  discussion  of  finance  the  same  intelligence 
which  is  used  in  ordinary  business.  Our  opponents  refuse  to  apply  the  law  of 
supply  and  demand  to  money.  We  affirm  that  a  decrease  in  the  number 
of  dollars  increases  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar.  We  affirm  that 
the  only  way  to  stop  the  rise  in  the  value  of  dollars  is  to  make  more  dollars. 
Our  opponents  do  not  apply  the  law  of  supply  and  demand  to  silver.  We 
assert  that  the  opening  of  our  mints  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver  will  create 
a  new  demand  for  silver,  and  that  that  new  demand  will  raise  the  price.  Our 
opponents  dispute  this,  and,  ignoring  the  effect  of  increased  demand,  talk  about 
a  fifty-three  cent  dollar,  because  the  bullion  in  a  dollar,  when  it  cannot  find  its 
way  to  the  mint,  is  worth  less  than  the  coinage  price.  We  assert  that  when 
every  man  who  holds  silver  bullion  caft  find  a  place  to  coin  that  bullion  into 
dollar  at  $1.29  an  ounce,  he  will  not  sell  the  bullion  to  any  one  else  for  less 
than  $1.29  an  ounce.     We  believe  that  seventy  millions  of  people  are  able  to 


448  IN  THE  SOUTH. 

use  every  ounce  of  silver  that  will  be  brought  to  our  mints.     We  state  our 
position  and  are  able  to  give  a  reason  for  our  belief. 

At  the  Phoenix  Hill  Park  meeting  I  met  ex-Congressman  A.  G. 
Caruth  and  I.  H.  Goodnight,  and  later  in  the  evening  Senator  Black- 
bum  and  Hon.  Watt  Hardin,  both  of  whom  spoke  during  the  evening. 

Early  the  next  morning  we  went  to  Frankfort,  passing  through 
LaGrange  and  Eminence.  The  speeches  at  these  places  were  brief, 
and  at  Frankfort  the  rain  was  falling  heavily.  We  took  dinner  with 
Senator  Blackburn  at  Versailles.  A  public  meeting  at  that  place  gave 
me  an  opportunity  to  testify  to  my  appreciation  of  Mr.  Blackburn 
as  a  Democrat  and  as  a  fighter.  Few  members  of  the  party  have  had 
to  contend  against  such  hostile  influences,  and  none  have  manifested 
a  higher  order  of  moral  courage. 

From  Versailles  we  went  to  Lexington,  where  we  were  warmly 
greeted.  The  rival  clubs  at  this  place  presented  to  me  handsome 
silver  badges  as  souvenirs  of  the  occasion.  The  horseback  parade 
here  was  the  finest  that  I  ever  saw;  some  of  those  who  participated 
in  it  had  ridden  a  hundred  miles  to  attend  the  meeting.  The  horses 
in  line  sustained  the  reputation  of  the  "Bluegrass"  State.  Below  will 
be  found  an  extract  from  the  speech  delivered  here : 

Lexington  Speech. 

I  have  been  interrupted  in  the  midst  of  speeches  before,  but  I  want  to  say 
to  you  that,  of  all  the  interruptions,  this  is  the  most  pleasant  of  which  I  have  any 
recollection.  I  shall  remember  this  as  the  speech  which  was  cut  in  two  by  the 
most  remarkable  horseback  parade  which  it  has  ever  been  my  good  fortune  to 
witness. 

They  bore  banners  and  presented  mottoes  which  make  any  further  speaking 
unnecessary.  If  I  were  to  talk  to  you  from  now  until  night,  I  could  not  more 
than  emphasize  the  mottoes  which  have  passed  in  procession  before  you.  I 
noticed  one  motto,  which,  though  written  in  letter  not  altogether  according  to 
the  latest  pattern,  presented  a  truth  which  ought  to  find  a  lodgment  in  the  mem- 
ories of  all.     It  was  "High  money — Low  times." 

I  challenge  you  to  find  in  any  of  the  speeches  that  will  be  made  this  year 
by  the  opponents  of  free  silver,  a  single  sentence  which  contains  as  much  of 
political  economy  and  common  sense  as  is  contained  in  that  phrase,  "High 
money — Low  times." 

I  saw  another  motto:  "Our  barns  are  full,  but  our  pockets  are  empty."  In 
that  sentence  is  epitomized  twenty  years  of  farming  history  in  the  United  States. 
Nature  smiles  upon  your  husbandry;  your  soil  gives  forth  in  rich  abundance, 
but,  according  to  the  experience  of  the  farmer,  with  all  his  industry,  economj', 
and  patient  toil,  he  finds  that  the  lot  of  the  American  farmer  grows  harder 
every   year. 

In  the  olden  times  under  the  rule  of  those  who  wielded  the  scepter,  as  they 


IN  THE  SOUTH.  AA9 

said,  by  right^  divine,  complaint  was  answered  with  the  lash,  but  now  the  just 
complaint  of  the  toiling  millions  of  the  United  States  is  answered  by  the 
charge  that  they  are  anarchists. 

I  protest  against  the  use  of  that  name  for  a  purpose  which  deprives  it  of  all 
its  terrors.  Those  who  are  opposed  to  us  cannot  afford  to  place  the  farmers 
and  laborers  of  this  country  in  the  position  of  enemies  of  the  government, 
because  they  are  the  only  friends  the  government  has  ever  had. 

There  is  another  motto  that  impressed  me  deeply.  It  is  a  short  motto, 
and  reads:  "We  mean  business."  The  humble  business  men  scattered  all  over 
our  land  have  as  much  right  to  the  use  of  the  name  "business  men"  as  those 
who,  having  large  business  in  the  great  centers,  assume  the  right  to  be  consid- 
ered the  only  business  men  of  this  country.  I  want  you  to  prove  my  state- 
ment true  by  showing  that  you  are  not  only  business  men,  but  that  you  under- 
stand that  election  day  is  the  most  important  business  day  in  all  the  year. 

From  Lexington  we  made  a  flying  trip  to  Maysville  and  return, 
with  brief  stops  at  Paris  and  Carlisle.  During  the  day  I  met  two 
more  acquaintances,  Congressman  McCreary,  who  attended  the  Lex- 
ington meeting,  and  Congressman  Berry,  who  was  at  Maysville. 

I  left  Lexington  near  midnight,  got  up  about  2  o'clock  to  give  a 
word  of  encouragement  to  the  silverites  of  Somerset,  Ky.,  and  reached 
Knoxville,  Tenn.,  early  in  the  morning.  The  meeting  at  Knoxville 
was  a  very  large  one,  and  ex-Governor  Taylor,  since  Governor-elect, 
shared  in  the  honors  of  the  occasion. 

The  ride  from  Knoxville  to  Asheville,  N.  C,  was,  owing  to  the 
heat,  a  very  uncomfortable  one.  After  a  dinner  at  the  Battery  Park 
Hotel  and  a  view  of  the  surrounding  mountains  we  proceeded  to 
the  speaker's  stand,  which  had  been  erected  in  the  center  of  a  natural 
amphitheater.  The  meeting  was  largely  attended  and  enthusiastic. 
Tliis  county,  Buncombe,  was  the  home  of  Senator  Vance,  and  he  is 
still  the  political  idol  of  the  people.  The  following  is  an  extract 
from  the  speech  made  here: 

Asheville  Speech. 
I  have  a  reason  for  coming  to  North  Carolina  which  is  personal,  aside 
from  my  interest  in  the  electoral  vote  of  this  State.  It  was  the  State  of 
North  Carolina  which  at  Chicago,  before  I  became  a  candidate,  before  my 
own  State  had  taken  any  formal  part  in  presenting  my  name — it  was  the 
State  of  North  Carolina  which,  by  resolution,  decided  to  give  me  the  unan- 
imous vote  of  the  North  Carolina  delegation  in  the  National  Convention. 
I  appreciate  the  honor  which  the  delegates  were  willing  to  do  me  and 
therefore  it  gives  me  great  pleasure  to  come  among  the  people  whom  they 
represented,  and  give  what  assistance  I  can,  if  any  assistance  be  needed,  to 
secure  the  electoral  vote  of  this  State  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver  at  16  to  i. 
I  am  glad  the  canvass  of  this  State  opens  in  this  county,  which  was  the  home 


450  IN  THE  SOUTH. 

of  one  of  the  grandest  public  men  given  to  this  nation — not  alone  by  North 
Carolina,  but  the  entire  country — Senator  Vance.  He  was  a  man  whom  I 
delighted  to  honor,  and  I  am  glad  that  I  stand  among  his  neighbors  and  friends 
advocating  the  same  cause  that  he  so  eloquently  advocated.  I  cannot  more  than 
impress  upon  your  memories  the  words  of  his  last  speech.  Let  me  read  you 
an  extract  from  it: 

The  great  fight  is  on.  The  money  power  and  its  allies  throughout  the  world  have 
entered  into  this  conspiracy  to  perpetrate  the  greatest  crime  of  this  or  any  other  age, 
to  overthrow  one-half  of  the  world's  money  and  thereby  double  their  wealth  by  enhancing 
the  value  of  the  other  half  which  is  in  their  hands.  The  money-changers  are  polluting  the 
temple  of  our  liberties.    To  your   tents,   O   Israel! 

He  foresaw  the  struggle  in  which  we  are  now  engaged.  He  realized  its 
magnitude  when  many  others  did  not.  Those  words  came  from  him  as  words 
of  command,  "To  your  tents,  O  Israel."  And  the  command  was  heeded  by 
the  Democratic  party.  The  silver  Democrats  engaged,  first,  in  a  warfare  within 
the  party  to  rescue  that  party  from  the  hands  of  those  who  were  using  it  to  ad- 
vance the  interest,  not  of  Democracy  but  of  plutocracy.  It  was  a  great  contest. 
I  venture  the  assertion  that  never  before  in  the  history  of  this  country  did  any 
party  have  such  a  contest  within  its  ranks  as  that  which  ended  at  Chicago.  I 
venture  the  assertion  that  never  before  in  the  history  of  this  country  have  the 
voters  themselves  had  so  much  to  do  with  a  convention  as  did  the  voters  of  the 
Democratic  party  with  the  convention  at  Chicago.  This  question  was  sub- 
mitted to  the  voters.  The  Democratic  idea  has  been  that  the  party  is  but  the 
instrument  of  those  who  compose  it,  and  derives  its  power  from  the  will  of  the 
voters  who  number  themselves  as  members  of  that  party.  Yet  it  is  often 
the  case  that  the  party  machinery  or  bosses  have  more  to  do  with  shap- 
ing the  policy  and  making  the  nomination  than  the  voters  themselves.  I 
am  proud  to  be  the  nominee  of  a  convention  which  represented  no  ma- 
chine and  no  bosses,  but  the  unpurchased  suffrages  of  the  voters 
of  the  party.  A  few  months  ago  the  most  sanguine  Democrat  did  not  believe 
that  success  this  fall  was  more  than  possible.  The  most  sanguine  Democrat 
felt  that  four  years  of  gold  standard  administration  had  destroyed  almost  the 
possibility  of  success.  But  the  voters  of  the  Democratic  party  determined  to 
make  one  final  fight  and  determined  that,  if  die  the  party  must,  it  should  at  least 
maintain  the  honor  of  those  who  believe  in  the  right  of  the  people  to  govern 
themselves.  The  result  is  just  what  it  always  is  if  people  lay  aside  expediency 
and  seek  to  do  their  duty  and  accept  the  consequences.  In  trying  to  do  right 
the  Democratic  party  won  a  possibility  of  success  which  it  never  could  have 
hoped  for  if  it  had  consulted  expediency.  The  gold  Democrats  demanded  the 
silver  Democrats  pledge  themselves  to  support  the  nominee. 

I,  for  one,  said,  that  whenever  our  opponents  would  bring  a  pledge  that 
the  gold  standard  Democrats  would  take,  it  would  be  time  enough  to  ask  free 
silver  Democrats  to  make  pledges.  I  stated  in  answer  to  an  inquiry  that  I 
would  not  support  for  President  a  man  who  would  in  the  Presidential  chair 
continue  the  present  financial  policy  and  mortgage  the  United  States  to  English 
bondholders. 

I  said  it  because  I  meant  it.  I  may  be  wrong  in  my  judgment,  because 
none  of  us  are  infallible,  but  my  judgment  is  the  only  judgment  that  can  control 
my  conduct.     Now  when  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  denounced  me  as  a 


IN  THE  SOUTH.  451 

Populist  and  quoted  me  as  saying  that  I  would  not  support  the  nominee,  I 
replied  that  I  did  not  expect  him  to  support  the  nominee  if  he  were  a  free 
silver  man.  The  time  came  when  he  was  put  to  the  test,  and  the  only  difference 
between  him  and  me  was  that  I  was  candid  enough  to  tell  the  people  that  I 
would  follow  my  conscience.  I  have  sent  him  no  letter  begging  his  support. 
The  highest  compliment  he  can  pay  me  is  to  oppose  me,  because  then  the  world 
will  know  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  whom  I  will  appoint,  if  I  am 
elected,  will  be  as  different  from  him  as  possible. 

I  do  not  dispute  the  right  of  any  Democrat  to  vote  against  the  Chicago 
ticket,  if  he  thinks  its  success  will  imperil  the  country,  but  what  I  ask  is  that 
these  men  who  have  been  pretending  to  be  Democrats  shall  now,  when  the 
Democratic  party  has  been  rescued  from  the  people's  despoilers,  leave  the  name 
and  not  attempt  to  take  that  name  with  them  into  disgrace. 

On  leaving  Asheville  the  train  stopped  for  a  moment  at  Black 
Mountain,  within  sight  of  the  Vance  homestead?  Short  speeches  were 
made  during  the  evening,  among  other  places,  at  Hickory  and  States- 
ville. 

The  next  day's  work  began  early,  with  a  large  meeting  in  the  public 
square  at  Charlotte,  followed  by  short  stops  at  Concord,  Lexington 
and  Salisbury.  At  the  latter  place  I  was  introduced  by  Major  T.  F. 
Kluttz,  who  seconded  my  nomination  in  the  Chicago  convention, 
While  at  Salisbury  I  learned  that  Andrew  Jackson,  in  his  younger 
days,  had  studied  law  there. 

The  meeting  at  Greensboro  was  one  of  the  largest  held  in  the 
State.  Some  two  years  before  I  had  visited  the  city  and  delivered 
an  address  upon  bimetallism  at  the  Normal  College  located  there, 
and  on  this  occasion  I  had  the  pleasure  of  renewing  an  acquaintance 
with  many  whom  I  had  met  on  the  former  visit. 

From  Greensboro  we  went  to  Raleigh,  stopping  at  Durham,  the 
home  of  Colonel  Julian  S.  Carr,  who,  as  chairman  of  the  reception 
committee,  was  with  us  during  the  journey  through  the  State,  and 
whose  care  and  thoughtfulness  added  much  to  the  comfort  of  the 
entire  party.  At  Raleigh  the  meeting  was  held  in  the  evening,  and 
was  very  largely  attended.  Chairman  Clement  Manley,  of  the  Demo- 
cratic State  Committee,  and  Chairman  Hal  W.  Ayer,  of  the  Populist 
State  Committee,  jointly  presided  at  the  Raleigh  meeting.  They 
were  with  me  during  the  entire  trip  through  the  State,  as  were  also 
National  Committeeman  Josephus  Daniels,  and  Major  E.  J.  Hale,  a 
delegate  to  the  Chicago  convention.  Speaking  of  the  experiences  of 
a  candidate,  I  said,  in  the  Raleigh  speech: 


452  IN  THE  SOUTH. 

Raleigh  Speech* 

The  trip  through  North  Carolina  has  been  so  well  managed  that  at  the 
close  of  the  second  day  I  am  feeling  better  than  I  did  when  I  commenced 
talking  to  the  people  of  the  State.  I  have  followed  somewhat  the  example  of 
the  man  who,  iti  seeking  employment  in  Southern  Illinois,  urged  in  his  behalf 
that  he  never  became  tired,  hungry  or  sleepy.  After  he  had  been  at  work 
for  a  little  while,  his  employer,  going  out  into  the  field,  found  him  resting 
under  a  tree,  and,  reminding  him  of  what  he  had  said,  received  his  explanation, 
namely,  that  he  rested  before  he  got  tired,  ate  before  he  got  hungry,  and 
went  to  sleep  before  he  got  sleepy.  It  has  been  a  great  pleasure  to  note 
the  interest  which  the  people  of  this  State  are  taking  in  the  campaign, 
and  while  their  demonstrations  of  affection  and  interest  sometimes  come  near 
keeping  me  from  getting  into  the  place  of  speaking  and  out  of  it,  yet  I  feel  as 
your  own  great  statesman,  Vance,  once  said.  Some  one  asked  him  if  it  did 
not  nearly  kill  him  to  have  the  people  pulling  him  around  and  shaking  hands 
with  him.  He  replied:  "Yes,  it  does  nearly  kill  me,  but  if  they  did  not  do  it, 
it  would  entirely  kill  me."  So,  while  it  is  rather  hard  to  bear  up  under  all  the 
affection  that  is  bestowed  upon  a  candidate,  it  is  a  great  deal  easier  to  get 
along  with  it  than  it  would  be  to  get  along  without  it. 

In  discussing  the  breaking-down  of  party  lines,  I  said: 

At  last  we  have  the  line  drawn  so  that  a  man  can  take  his  place  on  one 
side  or  the  other,  and  the  result  is  that  a  great  many  Republicans  who  had  hoped 
to  secure  bimetallism  in  the  Republican  party  have  now  given  up  hope  and 
joined  with  those  who  demand  the  immediate  restoration  of  free  coinage,  and 
some  in  the  Democratic  party  who  had  sought  to  further  the  gold  standard 
by  secret  means,  have  now  joined  with  the  Republican  party,  and  a  few,  instead 
of  going  all  the  way,  have  stopped  at  the  half  way  point  to  rest  a  moment  be- 
fore completing  their  journey.  You  may  rest  assured  that  the  lines  now  drawn 
are  drawn,  not  temporarily,  but  permanently.  The  man  who  leaves  the  Demo- 
cratic party  today,  when  the  party  is  taking  up  its  fight  for  the  common  people, 
must  understand  that  if  he  comes  back  he  must  come  back  in  sack  cloth  and 
ashes.  Not  only  that,  but  he  must  bring  forth  works  meet  for  repentance.  The 
men  who  are  in  the  employ  of  trusts  and  syndicates  and  combinations  are  not 
leaving  the  party  for  their  country's  good;  they  are  leaving  their  party  for  their 
party's  good.' 

Later,  referring  to  an  argument  sometimes  made,  that  the  substi- 
tutes for  money  have  made  money  itself  less  important  than  formerly, 
I  said: 

There  was  a  banker  down  in  Oklahoma  who  told  his  depositor  that  money 
was  not  as  important  as  it  used  to  be.  "Why,"  said  the  banker,  "if  you  de- 
posit money  in  my  bank  you  give  a  check  for  a  given  amount  and  it  goes 
through  various  hands,  and  finally  some  one  deposits  it  at  the  bank.  No 
money  changes  hands.  I  merely  transfer  the  amount  on  the  books  from  one 
account  to  the  other.  Don't  you  see,  money  is  not  as  important  "as  it  once 
was?"  The  depositor  replied.  "I  am  glad  to  hear  that.  I  have  been  keeping 
my  money  on  deposit  with  the  idea  that  it  was  just  as  important  as  ever;  but 


SNAP-SHOT  AND  CROWD  AT  WELLSVILLE,  O. 


IN  THE  SOUTH.  455 

now  that  you  have  shown  me  my  mistake,  I  will  draw  out  my  money  and  go 
on  checking  as  I  did  before."  "Well,  in  your  case  that  will  not  work,"  said 
the  banker.  No,  it  won't  work.  The  very  people  who  tell  you  that  money 
is  not  as  important  as  it  used  to  be  are  the  ones  who  regard  money  as  just  as 
important  as  it  ever  was  if  you  owe  them  and  cannot  pay. 

The  visit  at  Raleigh  ended  with  a  banquet  at  the  Park  Hotel. 
Among  the  old  acquaintances  met  at  Raleigh  were  ex-Governor  Carr, 
who  was  the  State  executive  at  the  time  of  my  former  visit,  and  Con- 
gressman Alexander, 

The  next  day  began  with  a  meeting  at  Goldsboro.  The  New 
York  State  Convention  had  just  adopted  its  platform,  and  I  took  oc- 
casion to  refer  to  it,  saying: 

Goldsboro  Speecfu 

Sometimes  we  are  accused  of  raising  a  sectional  issue.  One  of  the  best 
evidences  that  the  platform  adopted  at  Chicago  does  not  raise  a  sectional 
issue  is  found  in  the  language  of  the  platform  adopted  yesterday  in  New  York. 
Read  it.  After  unreservedly  endorsing  the  platform  and  the  candidates  of 
the  Chicago  convention,  it  declares  as  its  deliberate  judgment  that  never  in  the 
history  of  the  Democratic  party  has  a  platform  been  written  that  embodies  more 
completely  the  interests  of  the  whole  people,  as  distinguished  from  those 
who  seek  legislation  for  private  benefit,  than  that  given  to  the  country  by  the 
Democratic  National  Convention  of  1896.  There,  within  the  shadow  of  Wall 
street,  there,  against  the  combined  opposition  of  those  who  were  once  the 
leading  Democrats  of  New  York,  the  Democracy  of  New  York  declares  the 
Chicago  platform  to  be  the  most  Democratic  platform  ever  put  before  the 
country.  In  the  State  of  Connecticut  the  Democrats  have  endorsed  our  plat- 
form as  they  have  also  in  the  States  of  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey.  In 
these  and  other  Eastern  States  the  Democracy  is  beginning  to  realize  that  the 
Democratic  platfosm  speaks  for  the  American  people  upon  the  great  issues. 

The  fusion,  for  a  while  doubtful  in  North  CaroHna,  was  finally 
consummated.  I  expressed  my  gratification  and,  among  other  things, 
said: 

In  this  campaign  we  are  fighting  together  instead  of  fighting  among  our- 
selves. I  remember  that  a  few  years  ago  a  Populist  in  Congress  stated  that  the 
small  burros  that  run  wild  upon  the  prairies  of  South  America  form  a  group, 
when  attacked  by  a  ferocious  animal,  and,  putting  their  heads  together  and  their 
feet  on  the  outside  of  the  circle,  protect  themselves  from  the  enemy.  But  he 
added  that  the  advocates  of  reforms  sometimes  showed  less  discretion,  and, 
turning  their  heads  toward  the  enemy,  kicked  each  other.  It  is  often  the  case 
that  those  who  are  fighting  for  reform  interfere  with  each  other,  and 
counteract  each  other's  work  because  they  cannot  entirely  agree.  In  this 
campaign  those  who  believe  in  the  free  coinage  of  silver  have  joined  together, 
regardless  of  difJerences  of  opinion  upon  other  subjects.  Democrats  who 
believe  in  tariff  reform  and  Republicans  who  believe  in  protection  are  able 
to  come  together  when  both  recognize  that  the  money  question  is  the  para- 


456  IN  THE  SOUTH. 

mount  issue.  A  Populist  leader  of  this  State  well  expressed  the  idea  when  he 
said,  "While  I  believe  in  Populist  doctrines,  and,  among  other  things,  in 
the  Government  ownership  of  railroads,  I  do  not  want  the  Government  to 
own  the  railroads  so  long  as  Rothschild  owns  the  Government."  It  is 
this  willingness  to  lay  aside  minor  differences  in  hours  of  danger  that  gives 
us  the  surest  proof  that  our  people  are  able  to  rise  to  the  requirements  of  any 
emergency. 

There  were  meetings  at  several  other  places,  the  tour  of  the  State 
ending  at  Rocky  Mount,  where  I  met  ex-Congressman  Bunn,  an- 
other colleague  in  the  House. 

The  tour  through  North  Carolina  was  very  well  arranged,  and 
in  its  management  there  was  perfect  harmony  between  the  leading 
Democrats,  Populists  and  silver  Republicans. 

This  State  is  credited  with  the  largest  contribution  to  my  assort- 
ment of  rabbits'  feet.  Total  number  received  nearly  thirty — North 
Carolina's  quota  about  ten.  The  first  foot  was  presented  to  me  as 
I  left  the  Chicago  convention,  just  after  my  speech  in  support  of  the 
platform,  donor  unknown.  These  were  all  declared  to  be  of  the  "left 
hind  foot"  variety,  but  even  with  the  aid  of  horseshoes  and  four-leaf 
clover  stalks,  they  were  impotent  to  secure  for  me  the  Presidency. 

Our  party  entered  Virginia  on  the  afternoon  of  the  i8th,  and 
after  a  short  stop  at  Petersburg,  where  I  met  Hon.  Mann  Page, 
whose  name  was  discussed  as  a  Vice-Presidential  candidate  in  the 
Populist  convention,  reached  Richmond  for  an  evening  meeting.  I 
was  driven  from  the  depot  to  the  home  of  Hon.  J.  Taylor  Ellyson, 
chairman  of  the  State  committee,  where  Senator  Daniel  and  Senator 
Martin  were  also  guests. 

The  meeting  at  Richmond  was  held  in  the  Auditorium,  which 
was  packed  to  its  fullest  capacity.  I  was  glad  to  speak  in  Virginia, 
not  because  campaigning  there  was  necessary,  but  because,  it  being 
the  birthplace  of  my  father,  I  had  from  my  boyhood  heard  much  of 
\^rginia  hospitality.  Then,  too,  I  was  glad  to  be  among  the  con- 
stituents of  Senator  Daniel,  who  has  contributed  so  much  of  elo- 
quence and  learning  to  the  cause  of  bimetallism.  His  speech  de- 
livered during  the  first  session  of  the  Fifty-fourth  Congress  was 
an  unanswerable  argument  in  favor  of  the  money  of  the  Constitu- 
tion. He  presided  at  the  Richmond  meeting,  and  in  his  intro- 
duction made  use  of  a  figure  which  was  afterward  illustrated  in  some 
of  our  silver  papers.  He  said:  "We  love  him  most  because  he  has 
rolled  away  the  stone  from  the  golden  sepulchre  in  which  Democracy 
was  buried." 


IN  THE  SOUTH.  457 

The  day  ended  with  a  meeting  in  front  of  the  Jefferson  Hotel, 
where  I  spoke  briefly  and  Senator  Daniel  spoke  more  at  length. 
Early  the  next  morning  we  took  the  train  for  Fredericksburg,  pass- 
ing through  the  country  in  which  both  Patrick  Henry  and  Henry 
Clay  were  born.  The  visit  to  Fredericksburg  is  remembered  with 
much  pleasure.  I  was  entertained  at  the  home  of  Mayor  White,  and 
there  met  another  colleague,  Congressman  W.  A.  Jones,  of  that  dis- 
trict.   Below  will  be  found  a  portion  of  my  Fredericksburg  speech : 

Fredericksburg,  Va.    The  Mary  'Washington  Monument. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  Fredericksburg  is  not  a  large  city 
and  yet  it  is  rich  in  incidents  of  great  historic  value.  Here  the  women  of 
America  have  reared  a  monument  to  Mary  the  mother  of  Washington.  I  am 
glad  to  stand  on  this  spot;  I  am  glad  to  feel  the  influences  which  surround 
her  grave.  In  a  campaign,  especially  in  a  campaign  like  this,  there  is  much  of 
bitterness,  and  sometimes  of  abuse  spoken  against  the  candidates  for  public 
office,  but,  my  friends,  there  is  one  character,  the  mother — a  candidate  for  the 
affections  of  all  mankind — against  whom  no  true  man  ever  uttered  a  word  of 
abuse.  There  is  one  name,  mother,  which  is  never  found  upon  the  tongue  of 
the  slanderer — in  her  presence  all  criticism  is  silenced.  The  painter  has,  with 
his  brush,  transferred  the  landscape  to  the  canvas  with  such  fidelity  that  the 
trees  and  grasses  seem  almost  real;  he  has  even  made  the  face  of  a  maiden 
seem  instinct  with  life,  but  there  is 'one  picture  so  beautiful  that  no  painter  has 
ever  been  able  to  perfectly  reproduce  it,  and  that  is  the  picture  of  the  mother 
holding  in  her  arms  her  babe.  Within  the  shadow  of  this  monument,  reared  to 
the  memory  of  her  who  in  her  love  and  loyalty  represents  the  mother  of  each 
one  of  us,  I  bow  in  humble  reverence  to  motherhood. 

I  am  told  that  in  this  county  were  fought  more  battles  than  in  any  county 
of  like  size  in  the  world,  and  that  upon  the  earth  within  the  limits  of  this  county 
there  fell  more  dead  and  wounded  than  ever  fell  on  a  similar  space  in  all  the 
history  of  the  world.  Here  opposing  lines  were  drawn  up  face  to  face;  here 
opposing  armies  met  and  stared  at  each  other  and  then  sought  to  take  each 
other's  lives.  But  all  these  scenes  have  passed  away  and  those  who  once  met 
in  deadly  array  now  meet  and  commingle  here  as  friends.  Here  the  swords 
have  been  turned  into  plowshares,  here  the  spears  have  been  converted  into 
pruning  hooks,  and  people  learn  war  no  more.  Here  the  bands  on  either  side 
once  stirred  up  the  flagging  zeal  with  notes  that  thrilled  the  hearts  of  men. 
These  two  bands  are  now  component  parts  of  one  great  band,  and  as  that  band 
marches  on  in  the  lead  playing  "Yankee  Doodle"  and  "Dixie"  too,  the  war- 
scarred  veterans  who  wore  the  blue  and  the  war-scarred  veterans  who  wore  the 
graj'  follow,  side  by  side,  each  vying  with  the  other  in  the  effort  to  make  this 
the  greatest  and  the  best  of  all  the  nations  on  God's  footstool. 

I  am  glad  to  visit  this  historic  place.  They  say  that  here  George  Wash- 
ington once  threw  a  silver  dollar  across  the  river;  but  remember,  my  friends, 
that  when  he  threw  that  silver  dollar  across  the  river  it  fell  and  remained  on 
American  soil.    They  thought  that  it  was  a  great  feat  then,  but  we  have  devel- 


458  IN  THE  SOUTH. 

oped  so  rapidly  in  the  last  hundred  years  that  we  have  financiers  who  can  leave 
George  Washington's  achievement  far  behind.  We  have  financiers  who  have 
been  able  to  throw  gold  dollars  all  the  way  across  the  Atlantic,  and  then  bring 
them  back  by  an  issue  of  bonds. 

Would  you  believe,  my  friends,  that  a  silver  dollar  which  was  good  enough 
to  be  handled  by  the  father  of  his  country  is  so  mean  a  thing  as  to  excite  the 
contempt  of  many  of  our  so-called  financiers?  Well,  it  is.  It  is  so  mean  that  they 
do  not  like  it.  Why,  our  opponents  tell  us  that  they  want  a  dollar  that  will  go  all 
over  the  world.  We  have  had  dollars  which  have  gone  over  the  world  so 
rapidly  that  we  want  a  dollar  that  will  stay  at  home  without  a  curfew  law. 

Our  opponents  tell  us  that  they  want  a  dollar  which  they  can  see  anywhere 
in  the  world  if  they  travel  abroad.  I  am  not  so  much  worried  about  our  dollars 
which  travel  abroad.  I  want  a  dollar  that  will  not  be  ashamed  to  look  a  farmer 
in  the  face. 

During  the  speech  here  a  gentleman  in  the  audience,  in  an  outburst 
of  enthusiasm,  shouted:  "Bryan,  I  am  not  a  Christian,  but  I  am 
praying  for  you."  This  gave  m6  an  opportunity  to  suggest  that  the 
people  of  that  community  had  an  additional  reason  for  desiring  my 
election,  because,  if  they  could  convince  the  gentleman  of  the  efficacy 
of  prayer,  they  might  make  a  Christian  out  of  him. 

The  Washington  committee  took  our  party  in  charge  at  Freder- 
icksburg, and  landed  us  safely  at  the  nation's  capital  about  the 
middle  of  the  afternoon. 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 


FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON. 

THE  Washington  meeting  was  held  September  19th,  the  one 
hundredth  anniversary  of  Washington's  farewell  address. 
Hon.  James  L.  Norris,  Hon.  Lawrence  Gardner,  and  other 
prominent  Democrats  residing  in  Washington  had  exerted  themselves 
to  make  this  meeting  a  success,  but  a  storm  of  rain  and  wind,  the 
most  severe  of  the  campaign,  was  a  serious  embarrassment.  I  give 
below  my  speech  at  this  place: 

Washington  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I  am  grateful  to  you  for  the  very 
cordial  welcome  which  you  extend  to  me  as  I  return  to  the  city  in  which  four 
years  of  official  life  were  spent.  I  see  before  me  the  faces  of  a  great  many  who 
are  young  men,  and  I  am  glad  to  speak  to  the  young,  because  we  who  are 
young,  and  who  in  the  course  df  nature  must  live  under  our  Government  for 
many  years,  are  especially  interested  in  making  that  government  good  enough 
to  live  under. 

I  desire  to  call  your  attention  to  two  planks  in  the  platform  adopted  at  Chi- 
cago, before  touching  on  other  matters  connected  with  the  campaign.  I  speak 
of  these  two  planks  because  they  directly  concern  the  people  who  live  in  the 
District  of  Columbia.  The  Chicago  platform  contains  this  plank:  "We  favor 
the  admission  of  the  Territories  of  New  Mexico,  Oklahoma  and  Arizona  into 
the  Union  as  States.  We  favor  the  early  admission  of  all  the  Territories  having 
the  necessary  population  and  resources  to  be  entitled  to  Statehood;  and  while 
they  remain  Territories  we  hold  that  the  officials  appointed  to  administer  the 
government  of  any  Territory,  together  with  the  District  of  Columbia  and 
Alaska,  should  be  bona  fide  residents  of  the  Territory  or  District  in  which  the 
duties  are  to  be  performed.  The  Democratic  party  believes  in  home  rule  and 
that  the  public  lands  should  be  kept  for  honest  settlers  and  not  to  feed  the 
rapacity  of  corporations." 

I  desire  to  emphasize  these  words:  "The  Democratic  party  believes  in 
home  rule."  I  believe  in  the  platform,  in  that  plank  of  the  platform  and  in  that 
portion  of  the  plank  which  I  have  emphasized.  When  I  say  I  believe  in  home 
rule,  I  do  not  mean  that  officials  appointed  shall  have  a  home  in  the  District 
and  in  the  Territories  after  they  commence  to  rule,  but  that  they  shall  have 
lived  there  before  their  appointment  to  office. 

Let  me  read  another  plank:  "We  are  opposed  to  life  tenure  in  the  public 
service.  We  favor  appointments  based  upon  merit,  fixed  terms  of  office,  and 
such  an  administration  of  the  civil  service  law  as  shall  afford  equal  opportuni- 

459 


460  FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON. 

ties  to  all  citizens  of  ascertained  fitness,  except  as  otherwise  provided  by  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States." 

My  friends,  we  are  in  favor  of  a  civil  service  reform  that  means  something, 
not  a  civil  service  reform  that  permits  one  President  to  suspend  the  civil  service 
until  he  can  get  his  friends  into  office  and  permits  another  President  to  extend 
the  civil  service  just  as  he  is  going  out. 

We  believe  in  appointments  based  upon  merit,  and  we  believe  in  examina- 
tions which  will  open  the  offices  to  those  of  ascertained  fitness.  We  are  in 
favor  of  fixed  terms  of  office  in  the  civil  departments  of  the  Government.  We 
want  it  so  that  when  a  man  goes  into  office  he  will  know  how  long  he  is  gomg 
to  stay  and  when  he  is  going  out.  We  do  not  want  to  build  up  an  office-holding 
class  and  fill  our  offices  for  life,  because  men  appointed  under  these  conditions 
are  likely  to  have  no  concern  except  to  draw  their  salaries.  We  believe  that  a 
life  tenure  which  relieves  a  man  from  all  further  care,  is  destructive  of  the 
highest  form  of  citizenship  and  ought  not  to  be  tolerated  in  a  country  like  ours. 

Now,  my  friends,  I  desire  to  call  your  attention  to  another  subject.  Our 
opponents  are  doing  as  much  for  us  in  this  campaign  as  we  are  able  to  do  for 
ourselves,  and  of  all  the  campaign  documents  recently  issued  the  most  important 
one,  in  my  judgment,  is  a  letter  written  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and 
just  given  to  the  public.  I  desire  to  quote  from  it  the  following  words:  "It  is 
the  duty  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  of  all  other  public  officials  to 
execute  in  good  faith  the  policy  declared  by  Congress.  And  whenever  he  shall 
be  satisfied  that  the  silver  dollar  cannot  be  kept  equal  in  purchasing  power  with 
the  gold  dollar  except  by  receiving  it  in  exchange  for  the  gold  dollar  when 
such  exchange  is  demanded,  it  will  be  his  duty  to  adopt  that  course."  I  want 
you  to  mark  these  words,  because  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  tells  you  that 
whenever  he  is  satisfied  that  it  is  necessary  he  will  at  once  redeem  silver  dollars 
in  gold.  I  call  your  attention  to  the  words  because  I  want  to  emphasize  the 
deception  which  has  been  practiced  by  this  administration  in  its  course  upon 
the  money  question. 

When  this  administration  advised  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  you  were 
told  that  the  repeal  of  that  act  would  remedy  the  difficulty.  Yet  as  soon  as  the 
Sherman  law  was  repealed  the  same  authority,  which  promised  relief  as  soon 
as  it  was  repealed,  came  to  Congress  with  the  demand  that  the  greenbacks  and 
Treasury  notes  be  retired  by  an  issue  of  gold  bonds  in  order  to  stop  the  drain 
upon  the  Treasury's  gold.  But  now  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  informs  you 
that,  even  if  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  were  all  retired  so  that  there 
would  not  be  a  dollar  of  paper  money  to  be  presented  for  gold,  yet  it  would 
be  his  duty  (whenever  in  his  opinion  it  became  necessary)  to  redeem  silver 
dollars  in  gold  and  start  another  endless  chain  and  drain  upon  the  Treasury. 
According  to  the  doctrine  laid  down  in  Mr.  Carlisle's  letter  you  cannot  stop  the 
drain  of  gold  from  the  Treasury  until  you  retire  all  the  silver  dollars  and  silver 
certificates,  and  leave  nothing  but  gold  as  the  money  of  the  country. 

I  am  glad  that  this  declaration  has  been  made.  I  am  glad  that  our  oppo- 
nents are,  step  by  step,  revealing  to  the  public  eye  this  heartless,  merciless, 
criminal  policy.  I  am  glad  that  they  have  told  the  public  that  we  must  have 
gold  alone  after  having  confessed  to  the  public  that  we  are  in  the  hands  of  two 
banking  syndicates  and  must  pay  them  for  that  gold  whatever  they  want. 


f'ROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON.  461 

Talk  about  monopolies!  Talk  about  trusts!  My  friends,  they  propose  to 
establish  the  most  gigantic  of  all  trusts — a  money  trust,  and  let  the  few  men 
who  hold  the  gold  dole  it  out  at  such  price  as  they  will  to  all  the  other  seventy 
millions  of  American  people.  I  denounce  the  policy  as  more  cruel  and  heart- 
less than  the  political  domination  of  a  foreign  power.  I  would  rather,  as  some 
one  has  said,  put  our  army  in  the  hands  of  a  foreign  general,  or  our  navy  in 
command  of  a  foreign  admiral,  than  to  put  the  Treasury  Department  in  the 
hands  of  a  Secretary  who  would  run  it  upon  the  European  plan.  I  would 
resist  such  a  financial  policy  with  as  much  earnestness  as  I  would  resist  the 
progress  of  an  invading  army  coming  to  attack  our  homes. 

Let  me  ask  you  a  question.  Did  the  administration,  when  recommending 
the  unconditional  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law,  believe  that  the  repeal  would  cure 
our  troubles?  If  it  did,  then  it  has  been  so  badly  mistaken  that  you  have  a 
right  to  mistrust  the  judgment  of  the  administration.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  administration  knew  that  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  would  not  bring 
relief  and  concealed  that  knowledge  from  the  American  people,  then  you  have 
a  right  to  distrust  the  honesty  of  the  administration. 

Did  the  administration  know  when  it  recommended  the  retirement  of  green- 
backs and  Treasury  notes  as  a  means  of  stopping  the  drain  upon  the  gold  in  the 
Treasury  that  it  would  propose  the  policy  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  has 
outlined  in  his  letter?  If  it  did  know  and  did  not  tell  the  people,  it  was  dis- 
honest in  not  taking  the  people  into  its  confidence,  and  if  it  did  not  know,  then 
let  it  confess  its  ignorance  of  monetary  laws  and  the  finances  of  this  country. 
Does  the  administration  know  now  that,  when  it  commences  to  redeem  silver 
dollars  in  gold,  it  will  start  another  endless  chain  which  may  drain  the  Treasury 
indefinitely  and  increase  the  bonded  debt  without  limit,  unless  all  the  silver 
dollars  are  retired  and  bonds  substituted  for  them?  If  it  does  not  know,  then  it 
must  confess  itself  ignorant  on  the  subject,  and  if  it  does  know  and  will  not  tell 
the  people,  then  we  have  a  right  to  question  the  candor  and  frankness  of  the 
administration. 

Do  not  think  that  my  language  is  harsh.  It  is  not  harsh.  These  men  are 
the  public  servants  of  the  American  people  and  they  have  no  more  right  to 
betray  the  people  into  the  hands  of  the  financiers  of  London  than  Benedict 
Arnold  had  to  betray  the  American  colonies  into  the  hands  of  the  British. 
This  is  all  I  have  to  say  about  the  Secretary's  letter  at  this  time. 

In  the  few  moments  left  to  me  I  will  call  attention  to  the  language  used  by 
the  father  of  his  country  in  his  message  given  to  the  world  one  hundred  years 
ago  today.  In  this  campaign  we  are  demanding  an  American  financial  policy 
for  the  American  people  and  are  insisting  that  to  our  people  alone  shall  be 
submitted  the  determination  of  the  kind  of  dollars  and  the  quantity  of  dollars 
the  American  people  shall  have.  The  Republican  party  in  convention  assembled 
adopted  a  platform  which  declares  that  we  must  maintain  the  present  gold  stand- 
ard until  the  leading  commercial  nations  of  Europe  shall  join  with  us  in  aban- 
doning it.  WasToington's  message  contains  a  rebuke  to  those  who  would  sur- 
render to  foreign  nations  the  right  to  dictate  our  policies.  He  said  "Against 
the  insidious  wiles  of  foreign  influence  (I  conjure  you  to  believe  me,  fellow- 
citizens),  the  jealousy  of  a  free  people  ought  to  be  constantly  awake;  since  his- 
tory and  experience  prove  that  foreign  influence  is  one  of  the  most  baneful  foes 
of  republican  government." 


462  FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON. 

We  are  today  feeling  the  effect  of  this  foreign  influence,  this  baneful  foe  of 
republican  government.  National  character  is  being  weakened  and  national 
independence  threatened  by  servile  submission  to  foreign  dictation.  Washing- 
ton also  said  in  that  message:  "There  can  be  no  greater  error  than  to  expect 
or  calculate  upon  real  favors  from  nation  to  nation.  It  is  an  illusion  which 
experience  must  cure,  which  a  just  pride  ought  to  discard."  Those  who  are 
expecting  foreign  nations,  dominated  by  the  creditor  classes,  to  join  with  us  in 
stopping  the  rise  in  the  value  of  the  dollar  are  doomed  to  disappointment.  It 
is  difficult  to  see  how  any  one  can  expect  silver  to  be  restored  to  its  rightful 
place  by  foreign  aid  when  we  have  waited  for  twenty  years  only  to  find  foreign 
nations  more  hostile  than  before.  They  covertly  threaten  that  they  will  use  the 
notes  which  they  hold  to  control  our  financial  policy.  If  relief  is  to  come  to 
the  American  people,  it  must  come  from  the  American  people  themselves  and 
on  this  day,  as  we  celebrate  the  one  hundredth  anniversary  of  Washington's 
farewell  address,  we  should  resolve  to  gain  our  own  financial  independence 
without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other  nation. 

The  evening  meetings  in  Baltimore  shortened  our  stay  at  Wash- 
ington. The  first  Baltimore  meeting  was  held  out  of  doors,  where  a 
large  crowd  assembled  in  spite  of  a  steady  rain.  I  was  again  among 
friends,  ex-Congjessman  Rusk  presiding  at  the  out-door  meeting, 
and  Senator  Gorman  at  the  meeting  in  Music  Hall.  Below  will  be 
found  a  portion  of  the  second  speech : 

Baltimore  Speech. 

I  desire  to  thank  the  commercial  men  for  the  badge  which  they  have  pre- 
sented, not  because  of  the  value  of  the  badge,  but  because  it  shows  that  the  com- 
mercial men  realize  that  they  cannot  sell  goods  unless  the  people  are  able  to 
buy. 

There  are  two  ideas  which  are  meeting  in  conflict  in  this  campaign.  The 
Republican  idea  is  that  all  you  have  to  do  is  to  have  confidence  that  you  have 
eaten,  and  that  you  will  feel  as  well  as  if  you  had  had  a  hearty  meal;  our  idea 
is  that  if  one  is  furnished  a  hearty  meal  he  will  then  have  the  pleasant  recollec- 
tion of  having  eaten  it.  Our  opponents  say  that  if  we  will  only  have  confidence, 
all  will  be  well;  we  say  that  when  we  furnish  a  basis  upon  which  confidence 
can  rest,  then,  and  not  till  then,  will  there  be  confidence. 

We  have  commenced  a  warfare  which  will  end  now  if  it  ends  in  success, 
but  which  will  never  end  until  it  does  end  in  success.  No  question  is  settled 
until  it  is  settled  right.  Neither  fraud  nor  intimidation  nor  corruption  ever 
settled  a  question  right.  They  tell  us  that  our  troubles  come  from  agitation; 
that  if  we  would  only  stop  agitating  all  would  be  well.  We  reply  that  when  all 
is  well  agitation  will  stop  of  itself.  They  find  fault  because  people  complain: 
let  them  take  away  the  cause  of  complaint  and  the  complaint  will  cease.  We 
complain  because  the  conditions  are  hard  for  the  producers  of  wealth,  and  then 
our  opponents  complain  at  our  complaint,  instead  of  complaining  of  the  con- 
ditions which  give  rise  to  our  complaint.  They  seem  to  have  the  idea  which 
is  said  to  have  prevailed  at  one  time — namely,  that  it  is  not  wrong  to  steal. 
but  that  it  is  a  /crime  to  be  caught  stealing.    We  denounce  the  gold  standard  as 


FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON.  463 

wrong;  we  denounce  the  dollar  under  a  gold  standard  as  a  robber.  Do  you 
think  that  we  have  reached  the  end  of  the  gold  standard?  There  is  no  end.  Do 
you  think  that  we  have  drained  the  cup  of  sorrow  to  its  dregs?  No,  my  friends, 
you  cannot  set  a  limit  to  financial  depression  and  hard  times.  If  the  influences 
which  are  at  work  are  able  to  drive  silver  out  of  use  as  standard  money  here, 
those  same  influences  will  be  turned  toward  other  nations;  if  they  succeed  here, 
what  reason  have  we  to  believe  that  they  will  fail  when  directed  against  weaker 
nations?  Every  nation  which  goes  to  the  gold  standard  makes  the  dollar 
dearer  still,  and  as  the  dollar  rises  in  value,  you  must  sacrifice  more  of  all 
of  the  products  of  toil  in  order  to  secure  it.  As  you  sacrifice  more  and 
more,  you  will  find  that  your  debts  virtually  increase  as  your  ability  to  pay 
your  debts  decreases,  and,  in  the  long  run,  the  capitalistic  classes  will  devour 
all  the  property. 

,  This  is  the  only  nation  which  is  in  a  position  to  make  the  fight  for  the 
restoration  of  bimetallism;  other  nations  are  powerless.  Do  the  masses  of 
England  want  a  gold  standard?  They  have  never  declared  for  it.  Do  the 
masses  of  Germany  want  a  gold  standard?  They  have  never  said  so.  Who 
want  the  gold  standard?  Those  who  "rule  by  right  divine,"  and  those  greater 
rulers  who  stand  behind  the  thronae  and  rule  through  national  debts.  If  the 
gold  standard  advocates  in  this  country  think  that  it  is  necessary  for  this  nation 
to  employ  a  foreign  banking  syndicate  to  take  care  of  the  United  States 
Treasury  when  we  have  but  a  small  national  debt,  how,  I  ask,  can  they  expect 
the  nations  of  Europe,  with  their  great  standing  armies,  with  their  great 
national  debts,  to  escape  from  the  clutch  of  the  money  changers? 

Our  opponents  say  that  this  money  question  is  a  business  question;  they  try 
to  rid  it  of  sentiment.  But  there  is  not  much  business  which  is  devoid 
of  sentiment.  The  man  who  toils  all  day  is  engaged  in  business,  but 
why?  Because  he  is  working  for  those  whom  he  loves  better  than  his 
own  life.  He  accumulates  property;  he  lays  aside  something  for  a  rainy  day, 
but  why?  When  a  man  accumulates,  you  call  it  a  matter  of  business,  and  yet, 
my  friends,  his  hopes  and  interests  are  entwined  about  his  accumulations  be- 
cause he  expects  that  after  he  is  gone  his  own  flesh  and  blood  will  enjoy  his 
property.  Take  sentiment  from  life  and  there  is  nothing  left.  When  our 
opponents  tell  us  that  we  are  running  a  sentimental  campaign  and  that  they 
are  running  a  business  campaign,  we  reply  to  them  that  we  are  simply  placing 
the  heart  of  the  masses  against  the  pocketbooks  of  a  few. 

Some  one  has  said  that  no  one  can  write  a  poem  in  favor  of  the  financial 
policy  of  the  present  administration,  and  why?  Because  there  is  nothing 
in  it  to  appeal  to  the  sentiment  or  to  the  heart.  It  would  require  a  large  reward 
to  bring  out  a  poem  which  would  portray  in  beautiful  language  the  advantage 
of  having  a  syndicate  run  the  Government  of  the  United  States. 

We  have  been  called  anarchists.  I  am  not  an  anarchist.  There  is  not 
beneath  the  flag  a  truer  friend  of  government  or  a  greater  lover  of  law  and 
order  than  the  nominee  of  the  Chicago  convention.  I  love  government,  and  I 
want  to  make  it  so  good  that  there  will  not  be  one  citizen  in  all  the  land  who 
will  not  be  willing  to  die  for  his  government.  I  love  law  and  order  so  much 
that  I  want  the  law  enforced  against  the  greatest  enemies  of  law  and  order — 
those  who  think  that  they  are  greater  than  the  Government  itself, 

23 


464  FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON. 

The  free  coinage  of  silver  is  the  first  step  toward  the  restoration  of  just 
conditions  in  this  country.  It  will  not  end  all  unhappiness;  it  will  not  bring 
prosperity  to  those  who  will  not  work;  it  will  not  give  a  competency  to  these 
who  will  not  save.  But  it  will  help  to  restore  the  heritage  which  has  been 
bartered  away;  it  will  help  each  man  to  secure  a  rriore  reasonable  share  of  the 
fruits  of  his  own  toil.  When  the  Government  has  been  taken  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  syndicates,  the  stock  exchanges  and  the  "combinations  of  money 
grabbers  in  this  country  and  Europe,"  the  door  will  be  open  for  a  progress 
which  will  carry  civilization  up  to  higher  ground. 

If  we  win  this  fight  now,  reform  will  begin  at  once;  if  we  are  defeated  in 
this  campaign  there  is  nothing  before  the  people  but  four  years  more  of 
harder  times  and  greater  agitation,  and  then  the  victory  will  come.  Our  oppo- 
nents say  that  they  want  to  restore  confidence,  but  the  Republican  party  cannot 
restore  prosperity  in  this  country  so  long  as  that  prosperity  is  doled  out 
to  us  by  foreigners  who  profit  by  our  distress. 

Business  men  complain  that  business  conditions  are  bad;  I  warn  them  that 
business  conditions  cannot  be  improved  by  following  out  the  financial  policy 
which  has  brought  business  to  its  present  condition.  There  is  an  old  saying 
that  the  hair  of  the  dog  cures  the  bite,  but  this  is  not  true  in  financial  legis- 
lation. 

Senator  Gorman  represented  a  very  considerable  number  of  Demo- 
crats, who,  believing  in  international  bimetallism,  allied  themselves 
with  the  independent  bimetallists  when  they  despaired  of  securing 
an  international  agreement.  The  Senator  did  excellent  service  dur- 
ing the  campaign,  both  at  the  council  table  and  in  the  field.  At  the 
second  meeting  the  Traveling  Men's  Silver  Club  presented  me  a 
handsome  badge.  During  the  ride  from  Washington  to  Baltimore 
I  fell  in  with  Deputy  Pension  Commissioner  H.  C.  Bell  and  Mr. 
E.  P.  Baldwin,  of  the  Treasury  Department,  both  of  whom  did  most 
effective  work  upon  the  stump  during  the  campaign. 

Sunday  was  spent  in  the  city  of  "Washington  at  the  home  of 
Mr.  C.  T.  Bride,  with  whom  I  roomed  while  in  Congress.  In 
the  forenoon  I  attended  service  at  the  New  York  Avenue  Presb>ierian 
church,  sitting,  by  invitation,  in  the  Lincoln  pew,  and  in  the  after- 
noon tried  to  secure  a  little  needed  rest,  preparatory  to  another  week's 
work. 

Monday  was  spent  in  Delaware,  with  an  afternoon  meeting  at 
Dover,  and  an  evening  meeting  at  Wilmington.  Both  of  these  meet- 
ings were  large,  and  gave  evidence  of  the  existence  of  considerable 
silver  sentiment  in  that  State.  Dover  is  the  home  of  General  Kenney, 
chairman  of  the  State  Committee,  and  Hon.  John  F.  Salisbury,  the 
delegate  who  cast  the  first  vote  for  me  in  the  National  Convention. 


FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON.  465 

The  afternoon  meeting-  was  attended  mostly  by  farmers.    A  portion  of 
my  speech  at  this  place  will  be  found  below : 

Dover  Speech. 

Aside  from  the  fact  that  I  have  been  making  quite  a  complete  tour  of 
the  country,  I  have  an  additional  reason  for  speaking  in  Delaware.  When 
the  nominating  speeches  for  the  Presidency  had  been  made  and  the  roll  was 
called,  the  first  vote  which  I  received  was  cast  by  one  of  the  delegates  from 
Delaware,  Mr.  Saulsbury,  who  lives  here,  and  it  gives  me  a  great  deal  of 
pleasure  to  meet  the  people  who  sent  him  to  Chicago. 

I  want  to  talk  with  you  awhile  this  afternoon  about  our  financial  condition. 
If  things  are  good,  then  there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  make  any  change 
in  legislation.  If  our  present  condition  is  satisfactory,  then  we  ought  to  leave  it 
alone.  No  one  can  advocate  any  kind  of  remedial  legislation,  except  on 
the  theory  that  there  is  something  that  needs  remedying.  Our  opponents 
confess  the  condition,  and  when  I  tell  you  that  you  cannot  remedy  the  pres- 
ent condition  except  by  financial  legislation,  our  opponents  tell  us  that  the 
trouble  is  in  the  tariff  question,  and  that  if  we  could  just  have  more  tariff,  times 
would  be  good  again. 

I  want  to  read  to  you  an  extract  from  a  speech  made  on  last  Satur- 
day by  the  Republican  candidate  for  President.  He  said:  "Under  the  Re- 
publican protective  policy  we  enjoyed  for  more  than  thirty  years  the  most 
marvelous  prosperity  that  has  ever  been  given  to  any  nation  of  the  world. 
We  not  only  had  individual  prosperity,  but  we  had  national  prosperity." 

Now,  there  is  a  statement  made  within  a  week  by  the  Presidential  candidate 
who  looks  back  for  thirty  years,  from  1890  to  i860,  and  tells  the  people  that 
during  that  period  we  enjoyed  the  most  marvelous  prosperity  'of  any  nation 
in  the  world,  and  that  we  had  both  individual  prosperity  and  national  pros- 
perity. I  want  to  show  you  how  distance  lends  enchantment  to  the  view. 
I  want  to  show  you  by  the  same  witness — the  testimony  was  given  six  years 
ago — that  after  thirty  years  of  his  kind  of  policy  the  farmers  of  this  coun- 
try were  not  prosperous.  If  you  will  take  the  report  filed  with  the  McKinley 
bill  on  the  i6th  of  April,  1890,  you  will  find  the  words  which  I  wish  to  quote: 
"That  there  is  widespread  depression  in  this  industry  today  cannot  be  doubted." 

Speaking  of  agriculture,  that  is  what  the  Presidential  candidate  said  when 
he  deliberately  wrote  the  report  and  filed  it  with  his  proposed  legislation. 

Again,  in  that  same  report,  he  said:  "One  of  the  chief  complaints  now 
prevalent  among  our  farmers  is  that  they  can  get  no  price  for  their  crops 
at  all  commensurate  to  the  labor  and  capital  invested  in  their  production." 
That  is  what  he  said  after  thirty  years  of  the  kind  of  policy  which  he  now 
says  will  bring  you  prosperity. 

Let  me  read  again:  "We  have  not  believed  that  our  people,  already 
suffering  from  low  prices,  can  or  will  be  satisfied  with  legislation  which  will 
result  in  lower  prices.  No  country  ever  suffered  when  prices  were  fairly  re- 
munerative in  every  field  of  labor." 

After  thirty  years  of  that  kind  of  policy  he  tells  you  that  the  people 
were  then  suffering  from  low  prices,  and  that  no  country  ever  suffered  when 
prices  were  fairly  remunerative  in  every  field  of  labor.    Now,  let  me  read 


466  FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON. 

you  again  what  he  says  in  this  same  report:  "This  great  industry" — speaking 
of  agriculture — "is  foremost  in  magnitude  and  importance  in  our  country. 
Its  success  and  prosperity  are  vital  to  the  nation.  No  prosperity  is  possible  to 
other  industries  if  agriculture  languishes." 

That  is  what  he  said  in  1890 — that  there  was  depression  in  agriculture 
after  thirty  years  of  his  tariflf  policy,  and  that  without  prosperity  in  agricul- 
ture there  could  be  no  prosperity  among  the  other  industries  of  the  country. 

Let  me  read  you  just  one  other  extract:  "The  depression  in  agriculture  is 
not  confined  to  the  United  States.  The  reports  of  the  Agricultural  Depart- 
ment indicate  that  this  distress  is  general,  that  Great  Britain,  France  and  Ger- 
many are  suffering  in  a  larger  degree  than  the  farmers  of  the  United  States." 

There  he  is  telling  us  that  there  is  a  depression  in  agriculture  and  giving  the 
names  of  three  prominent  agricultural  nations  of  the  Old  World,  and  telling 
us  that  that  agricultural  depression  is  even  more  marked  over  there  than  it  is 
here.  I  want  you  to  remember  that,  when  you  read  in  the  papers  that  he 
said  that  for  thirty  years  we  had  such  marvelous  prosperity  in  this  country. 

Now,  my  friends,  I  have  quoted  you  what  he  said  about  the  depression  in 
agriculture  in  Germany.  Our  opponents  are  in  the  habit  of  telling  us  that 
all  the  civilized  nations  are  in  favor  of  the  gold  standard.  The  Germans  who 
live  in  this  country  point  with  a  just  pride  to  the  illustrious  Prince  Bismarck. 
Read  what  he  said  in  regard  to  bimetallism  within  a  few  weeks  in  a  letter 
to  Governor  Culberson,  of  Texas,  and  then  see  whether  he  testifies  that  the 
gold  standard  has  been  a  good  thing  for  Germany.  If  the  gold  standard  has 
been  a  blessing  to  Germany,  why  would  he  not  say  that  it  was  better  to  keep 
the  gold  standard  instead  of  getting  ri'd  of  the  gold  standard  and  substituting 
the  double  standard  by  international  agreement? 

We  have  those  among  us  who  have  said  that  the  other  nations  must  take 
the  lead.  Prince  Bismarck  says  that  the  people  of  the  United  States  are 
freer  by  far  in  their  movements  than  the  nations  of  Europe.  Can  it  be  that 
this  great  German  statesman  has  a  higher  conception  of  the  ability  of-  the 
people  of  the  United  States  than  the  Tories  who  are  not  willing  to  do  any- 
thing until  they  ask  the  consent  of  other  nations? 

Not  only  does  Prince  Bismarck  say  that  we  are  freer  to  take  action  than 
other  nations,  but  he  says  that  if  we  act  it  will  exert  a  most  salutary  in- 
fluence upon  the  consummation  of  international  agreement.  Prince  Bismarck 
testifies,  first,  that  the  gold  standard  is  the  policy  in  Germany,  and  that  he 
wants  bimetallism  restored;  he  testifies,  second,  that  the  United  States  is  in 
the  best  position  of  all  the  nations  to  take  the  lead.  He  testifies,  third,  that  if 
this  nation  takes  the  lead,  it  will  have  a  salutary  influence,  not  in  prevent- 
ing bimetallism,  but  in  bringing  other  nations  of  Europe  into  an  international 
agreement. 

I  desire  that  you  shall  remember  this  testimony,  coming  from  so  dis- 
tinguished an  authority  in  Germany.  Let  me  call  your  attention  to  another 
thing  which  Prince  Bismarck  said.  Our  opponents  tell  us  that  we  are  ar- 
raying one  class  against  another.  Let  me  tell  you  what  Prince  Bismarck  said 
in  regard  to  classes  on  the  question  which  concerns  agricultural  depression. 
A  little  more  that  a  year  ago  he  was  quoted  as  saying  before  a  farmer 
audience  in  Germany  that  the  farmers  must  stand  together  and  protect  them- 


FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON.  467 

selves  from  the  drones  of  society  who  produce  nothing  but  laws.  Remem- 
ber the  significance  of  those  words — that  the  farmers  must  stand  together  and 
protect  themselves  from  the  drones  of  society  who  produce  nothing  but  laws. 

Divide  society  into  two  classes;  on  the  one  side  put  the  non-producers, 
and  on  the  other  side  put  the  producers  of  wealth,  and  you  will  find  that  in 
this  country  the  majority  of  the  laws  are  made  by  the  non-producers  instead 
of  the  producers  of  wealth.  Bismarck  tried  to  arouse  the  farmers  of  Ger- 
many to  throw  out  these  drones  and  take  charge  of  legislation  themselves.  I 
suppose  they  will  call  Bismarck  an  agitator. 

I  suppose  they  will  say  that  he  ought  not  to  array  one  class  of  society 
against  another.  Of  course,  I  do  not  know  how  drones  feel  in  a  bee  hive, 
but  if  drones  could  make  speeches,  I  will  venture  the  assertion  that  you  coul'd 
no.t  tell  one  of  their  speeches  from  the  speeches  of  gold  standard  advo- 
cates. I  will  venture  to  say  that  if  the  drones  could  make  speeches  you  could 
not  distinguish  their  speeches  from  the  speeches  made  by  the  heads  of 
these  great  trusts,  who  call  all  who  do  not  believe  with  them  anarchists.  I 
will  venture  that  if  a  drone  could  talk  and  express  his  ideas  in  language,  there 
is  not  a  member  of  a  syndicate  that  has  been  beating  this  Government  but 
could  take  the  drone's  speech  and  use  it  as  his  own,  and  without  being  accused 
of  plagiarism. 

My  friends,  that  is  the  only  class  that  we  raise;  and  if  to  say  the 
people  who  fight  the  nation's  battles  in  time  of  war  have  a  right  to  do  the 
legislating  in  time  of  peace  is  raising  class  against  class,  then  I  am  willing 
to  be  called  an  agitator.  If  to  tell  the  people  who  produce  wealth  that  they 
have  a  right  to  make  the  laws  so  as  to  secure  to  themselves  a  just  portion 
of  the  wealth  they  produce,  instead  of  allowing  the  drones  to  make  the 
laws  and  eat  the  honey,  is  anarchistic,  then  I  plead  guilty  to  the  change  of  stir- 
ring up  discontent. 

I  will  venture  to  assert  that  if  the  drone  was  in  politics,  party  lines 
would  not  amount  to  very  much  with  him  if  he  had  a  business  interest 
on  the  other  side.  Show  me  the  head  of  a  syndicate  or  trust,  and  I  will 
show  you  a  man  who,  whenever  his  business  interests  are  involved,  be- 
comes suddenly  patriotic  and  tells  you  that  he  loves  his  country  too  much 
to  let  anybody  make  more  money  out  of  legislation  than  he  does. 

You  see  in  the  gold  standard  papers  how  they  parade  the  news  in  great 
big  headlines  every  time  a  Democrat  leaves  the  Democratic  party,  but  there 
is  not  one  of  them  telling  the  real  reason  why  he  leaves.  The  reason  why  these 
men  are  willing  to  contribute  enormously  to  the  campaign  fund  is  because  they 
know  that  if  the  Chicago  ticket  succeeds,  the  laws  will  be  enforced  against 
them  as  well  as  against  everybody  else. 

I  will  venture  the  assertion  that  there  is  not  half  of  the  men  who  are 
in  favor  of  a  gold  standard  who  can  tell  what  sixteen  to  one  means.  They 
do  not  understand  even  the  terms  which  are  used  in  the  discussion  of  the 
money  question.  I  would  be  willing  to  place  the  average  farmer  against 
the  average  banker  and  turn  them  loose  to  discuss  monetary  science  and 
financial  history,  and  the  banker  could  not  hold  his  own  with  the  farmer. 
Why?  Because  the  financier  thinks  that  he  knows  so  much  that  it  is  not 
necessary   for   him   to   study,   while   the   farmer   realizes   that  he   must   study 


468  FROM  WASHINGTON  TO  WILMINGTON. 

in  order  to  know  anything  about  the  question.  The  financier  has  been  get- 
ting along  so  well  that  he  thinks  it  is  not  necessary  for  him  to  worry,  while 
the  farmer  has  been  suffering  so  much  that  he  is  trying  to  find  what  is  the 
matter.  The  farmer  knows  that  by  making  money  scarce  he  makes  money 
dear  and  property  cheap. 

My  friends,  we  have  had  our  financial  legislation  run  by  those  people 
who  have  made  more  in  an  hour  gambling  in  stocks  and  bonds,  and  gambling 
in  what  the  farmers  produce,  than  all  the  farmers  of  the  Union  could  make 
producing  their  crops. 

Congressman-elect  Handy  was  with  us  during  the  day  and  pre- 
sided at  the  evening  meeting.  At  Wilmington  I  followed  somewhat 
the  line  of  argument  pursued  at  Milwaukee.  I  was  the  guest  here  of 
Mr.  B.  Lundy  Kent,  who  arranged  the  meeting  at  which  I  spoke 
some  months  previous  when  it  was  difficult  to  find  any  silver  advocates 
in  the  city. 


CHAPTER  XXXV. 


RELIGION    AND    POLITICS    MIXED, 

IN  the  course  of  my  remarks  at  Wilmington,  I  referred  to  the  po- 
sition taken  by  some  of  the  ministers,  and  used  the  following 
language  (I  quote  from  a  report  of  the  speech  which  appeared  in 
the  Wilmington  Evening  Journal) : 

Extract  from  Wilmington  Speech. 

You  will  find  in  our  cities  preachers  of  the  gospel,  enjoying  every  luxury 
themselves,  who  are  indifferent  to  the  cries  of  distress  which  come  up  from  the 
masses  of  the  people.  It  was  told  of  a  princess  in  a  foreign  land  that,  when 
someone  said  to  her,  "the  people  are  crying  for  bread,"  she  replied,  "Why  don't 
they  eat  cake?"  Tell  some  of  these  ministers  of  the  gospel  that  men  out  of 
work  are  driven  into  crime,  and  they  cannot  un-derstand  why  everyone  is  not  as 
well  off  as  themselves.  When  I  have  seen  preachers  of  the  gospel  using  even 
more  bitter  speech  than  politicians  against  the  clamorings  of  the  people,  I  have 
wondered  where  they  got  the  religion  that  they  preach.  My  friends,  the  com- 
mon people  were  never  aided  in  their  struggles  by  those  who  were  so  far  be- 
yond them  that  they  could  not  feel  their  needs  and  sympathize  with  their  inter- 
ests. 

There  were  some  inaccuracies  in  the  report,  but  it  was  substan- 
tially correct.  This  passage  was  severely  criticised  by  one  of  the  min- 
isters of  the  city,  and  was  commented  upon  elsewhere.  I  do  not  believe 
that  the  sentiment  there  expressed  can  be  successfully  assailed.  No 
minister  claims  to  be  entirely  beyond  the  reach  of  those  influences  which 
beset,  and  to  a  large  extent  mold  the  characters  of  others.  No  minister 
whose  position  is  such  as  to  prevent  actual  contact  with  the  poor  and 
the  needy  can  fully  appreciate  their  condition.  In  saying  this,  I  do 
not  mean  to  reflect  upon  the  members  of  that  calling,  because  no 
one  has  a  higher  respect  for  them  than  I.  But  I  mean  to  state  a 
general  rule  which  applies  to  people  in  all  callings,  professions  and 
occupations.  In  stating  the  rule,  I  do  not  mean  to  deny  that  there 
are  exceptions,  but  the  rule  is  of  general  application.  We  can  only 
become  acquainted  with  a  subject  by  study,  and  we  cannot  study 
a  subject  until  it  is  brought  to  our  attention.  One  of  the  Latin  poets 
speaks  of  the  cares  "which  hover  about  the  fretted  ceilings  of  the 
rich."  The  poor,  knowing  nothing  of  these  cares,  are  apt  to  misjudge 
and  misunderstand  the  rich.     The  rich,  knov/ing  nothing  of  the  pri- 

469 


470  RELIGION  AND  POLITICS  MIXED. 

vations  and  hardships  of  the  poor,  are  apt  to  misunderstand  and  mis- 
judge the  poor.  The  extremes  of  society  know  too  httle  about  each 
other;  both  would  be  better  if  the  acquaintance  between  them  was 
intimate. 

I  did  not  often  refer  to  ministerial  criticism,  because  it  was  in 
the  same  line  with  criticism  from  other  sources.  The  gold  standard 
minister  used  the  same  arguments  as  the  gold  standard  banker,  the 
gold  standard  business  man  and  the  gold  standard  politician,  just  as 
the  silver  preacher  used  the  same  arguments  as  the  silver  banker,  the 
silver  business  man,  and  the  silver  poUtician.  I  found  in  every  church 
preadiers  and  laymen  who  bitterly  denounced  both  my  platform  and 
myself,  while  in  every  church  I  found  both  ministers  and  laymen 
who  supported  me  and  approved  of  the  policies  which  I  advocated. 
The  Republican  National  Committee  sent  a  circular  letter  to  various 
church  societies,  pointing  out  the  harm  which,  according  to  the 
gold  standard  doctrine,  free  coinage  would  bring  to  those  engaged 
in  church  work.  I  referred  on  a  few  occasions  to  this  appeal  to 
the  churches. 

At  Albany  I  suggested  that  there  was  one  argument  which  might 
be  made  by  the  gold  standard  advocates,  if  they  could  find  a  minister 
who  looked  at  the  question  purely  from  the  standpoint  of  dollars  and 
cents.  That  argument  was  this,  that  the  gold  standard  produces 
want  and  destitution;  that  want  and  destitution  result  in  an  increase 
in  crime;  that  an  increase  in  crime  might  increase  the  demand  for 
ministers  to  counteract  it.  At  Raleigh,  N.  C,  I  referred  to  a  violent 
denunciation  uttered  against  me  by  a  New  York  preacher,  and  added 
that  I  would  take  my  chances  with  Lazarus  if  he  was  willing  to  risk 
his  chances  with  Dives.  I  believe  that  he  afterward  replied  that  the 
lot  of  Lazarus  would  have  been  different  if  he  had  tried  to  pay  his 
debts  in  a  50-cent  dollar.  At  Fredericksburg,  Va.,  referring  to  the 
Republican  appeal  to  ministers,  I  said  that  the  gold  standard,  by  di- 
minishing the  incomes  --f  the  church  members,  would  finally  attack 
the  ministers'  salaries,  even  if  it  had  not  done  so  already,  adding  that 
I  would  give  to  my  opponents  the  support  of  all  the  ministers  whose 
salaries  were  paid  up  to  date,  if  I  could  have  the  support  of  all  the 
ministers  whose  salaries  were  behind.  After  the  meeting  a  clerg>man 
notified  me  that  according  to  that  arrangement  he  would  have  to  be 
classed  among  my  supporters. 

At  Youngstown,  O.,  I  read  a  letter  which  had  been  sent  out  a 
few  days  before  by  a  Presbyterian  society,  calling  attention  to  the 


RBUGIOM  AND  POLITICS  MIXED.  471 

fact  that  a  great  many,  home  missionaries  were  months  behind  on 
their  salaries,  and  mentioning  several  instances  of  great  privation. 

In  order  that  readers  of  this  volume  may  know  how  some  of  the 
clergy  regarded  the  silver  plank  and  the  candidate,  I  give  a  few 
extracts, 

September  27th  the  Rev.  Dr.  Charles  H.  Parkhurst,  in  a  ser- 
mon delivered  at  the  Madison  Square  Presbyterian  church.  New 
York,  said: 

I  am  not  here  to  argue  the  financial  question.  The  present  conditions 
illustrate  the  truth  I  am  trying  to  drive  home.  National  prosperity  will  come 
back  when  confidence  comes  back,  when  the  nation  gets  its  feet  out  of  the  quag- 
mire and  back  onto  solid  ground.  The  business  of  the  nation  is  done  on  credit. 
Credit  is  based  on  mutual  confidence.  Mutual  confidence  does  not  exist  today 
and  attempts  are  being  made,  deliberate  and  hot  blooded,  to  destroy  what  lit- 
tle of  it  remains.  I  dare,  in  God's  pulpit,  to  brand  such  attempts  as  accursed 
and  treasonable. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Robert  S.  McArthur,  of  the  Calvary  Baptist  church, 
West  Fifty-seventh  street.  New  York,  on  September  13th,  said: 

There  cannot  really  be  any  conflict  between  labor  and  capital,  when 
both  are  rightly  understood.  Labor  is  capital  and  capital  is  merely  the  fruit 
of  labor.  Let  us  not  allow  any  distinction  to  be  made.  Nearly  all  of  the  Amer- 
ican people  belong  to  the  toiling  masses.  The  pen  is  often  a  far  more  heavy 
instrument  of  labor  than  the  pick  or  the  shovel.  He  is  the  enemy  of  the 
toiling  masses  who  would  pay  for  their  labor  in  depreciated  coin.  These 
Populistic  orators  who  are  trying  to  make  wage  earners  believe  that  they 
should  be  willing  to  take  a  fifty-three  cent  dollar  for  one  hundred  cents'  worth 
of  work  are  the  enemies  of  mankind. 

Speaking  of  my  letter  of  acceptance,  he  said: 

Really  the  author  of  that  composition  must  be  a  very  commonplace  sort 
of  a  citizen.  It  may  be  well  doubted  if  ever  before  since  the  foundation  of  the 
Republic  so  weak  a  production  came  from  the  hand  of  a  man  who  aspired  to  be 
the  President  of  the  United  States.  It  reads  as  though  the  author  had  neither 
hope  nor  heart  in  his  cause.  The  whole  letter  is  marked  by  an  absence  of 
thought.  It  seems  clearly  to  show  that  the  writer  has  lost  courage,  heart,  hope, 
push  and  pluck.  Yet  in  it  he  still  shows  his  sympathy  with  some  of  the  most 
dangerous  planks  of  the  platform  on  which  he  stands. 

On  the  question  of  civil  service  reform,  he  said: 

Civil  service  reform  is  a  great  moral  issue.  In  the  years  to  come  the 
interest  in  this  reform  shown  by  the  Presidents  I  have  named,  and  particularly 
by  President  Cleveland,  will  redound  to  their  glory.  The  ignorance  of  the  can- 
didate for  the  Presidency  of  whom  I  am  speaking  in  regard  to  civil  service 
reform  would  be  unworthy  of  an  alderman  in  a  small  city.  Were  this  man 
not  a  candidate  for  President,  as  I  have  said,  his  letter  would  be  unworthy  of 
notice,  but  should  he  be  elected  he  will  have  control  of  hundreds  of  thousands 

27 


472  kELIGtON  AND  POLITICS  MIXED. 

of  offices.  He  writes  as  though  he  knew  nothing  of  and  cared  to  know  nothing 
of  the  laws  governing  appointments.  Perhaps  I  need  not  worry  myself,  for  the 
American  people  will  see  to  it  that  he  never  has  the  dispensing  of  offices  from 
the  chair  of  the  President  of  the  United  States,  the  chair  higher  than  the  loftiest 
room  beneath  God's  throne  tonight. 

On  Monday,  October  2,  there  appeared  in  the  press  of  the  country 
a  statement  made  by  Archbishop  Ireland  in  response  to  a  request  from 
twenty-seven  business  men  of  Minnesota.  After  denouncing  other 
planks  of  the  platform,  he  said : 

The  question  before  the  people  oT  America  today  is  the  coinage  of  silver 
by  this  country  independently  of  the  great  commercial  nations  of  the  world  at 
the  ratio  of  16  to  i.  The  boast  that  the  United  States  is  able  alone  to  whip 
England  and  the  rest  of  the  world  into  coinage  of  silver  at  16  to  i,  or  to  force 
the  value  of  silver  up  to  $1.29  an  ounce,  is  mere  nonsense.  We  are  a  great  peo- 
ple, indeed,  but  we  have  not  yet  grown  to  that  commercial  strength  that  our 
country  means  the  commercial  world.  Herr  Bismarck  counseled  the  United 
States  to  go  ahead  and  make  the  experiment  all  alone.  Yes,  and  some  Ameri- 
cans quote  his  advice  as  an  authority.  The  sly  old  fox  would,  indeed,  be  pleased 
to  see  America  make  the  experiment  and  go  to  the  bottom  of  the  sea. 

I  am  absolutely  convinced  that  the  laboring  classes  will  suffer  most  of  all 
from  free  silver  coinage;  but  will  not  the  farmers  be  benefited?  Will  they  not 
receive  a  higher  price  for  their  products?  May  be  a  higher  price — but  not  a 
higher  value.  Of  what  use  is  it  to  have  a  dollar  instead  of  a  half  dollar,  if  a 
dollar  can  purchase  no  more  than  the  half  dollar? 

I  may  of  course  be  mistaken.  But  I  have  come  to  look  upon  the  present 
agitation  as  the  great  test  of  universal  suffrage  and  popular  sovereignty.  Can 
the  people  defend  the  public  honor  and  the  institutions  of  the  country  at  the 
polls,  as  they  have  done  on  the  field  of  battle?  Can  they  be  so  calm  and  delib- 
erate in  their  judgment,  so  careful  to  weigh  all  things  in  the  scale  of  reason, 
and  to  avoid  all  rash  experiments,  that  they  can  be  trusted  with  the  settlement 
of  grave,  social  and  political  problems?  That  is  the  question  that  is  before  us 
at  the  present  moment. 

At  the  Central  Congregational  church  in  New  York,  on  Septem- 
ber 13,  the  Rev.  A.  J.  F.  Behrends  said,  among  other  things: 

Today  we  are  at  the  cross  roads  of  our  period  of  national  existence.  When 
it  is  proclaimed  that  a  grain  of  gold  representing  the  cost  of  production  of  31 
grains  of  silver  is  an  equivalent  for  16  grains  of  the  latter  metal,  we  are  con- 
fronted with  a  bold  bare-faced  falsehood.  Such  a  doctrine  leads  on  the  trail  of 
anarchy.  Thirty-five  years  ago  the  liberty  of  a  people  was  hunted  to  its  lair, 
and  it  was  preserved  with  the  bayonet.  The  people  of  the  United  States  will 
assemble  this  fall  as  they  did  in  1861,  only  instead  of  the  bayonet  the  ballot  will 
be  used  to  prevent  repudiation  and  preserve  the  nation's  honor.  This  is  not 
a  political  sermon,  but  I  want  to  warn  those  who  would  run  the  ship  of  state 
against  the  rocks  of  discredit  and  dishonor  that  Columbia  would  probably  get 
the  worst  of  it,  and  I  would  save  generations  ahead  from  misery  and  suffering. 


RELIGION  AND  POLITICS  MIXED.  473 

On  that  day  also  the  Rev.  Cortland  Myers  touched  on  politics  in 
the  Baptist  Temple  at  Brooklyn.     Among  other  things  he  said: 

This  pulpit  is  absolutely  non-partisan,  but  it  is  positively  patriotic  and 
Christian.  It  does  not  stand  for  party,  but  as  long  as  it  stands  for  Christ  it 
must  stand  for  principle.  The  chief  issues  of  this  campaign  directly  afifect  the 
Gospel  of  Christ  of  Calvary.  I  must  be  heard  and  will  be  heard  against  all  dis- 
honesty and  anarchy  and  kindred  evil.  I  love  the  blood-stained  banner  of  the 
cross,  and  it  is  ever  in  danger.  I  love  every  stripe  and  every  star  of  Old  Glory, 
and  it  is  at  this  moment  in  danger.  I  must  speak  every  Sunday  from  now  until 
November.  I  shall  denounce  the  Chicago  platform.  That  platform  was  made 
in  hell.  Dishonesty  never  came  from  heaven;  anarchy  never  came  from  heaven; 
class  making  and  disunion  never  came  from  that  upper  world.  Its  silence 
concerning  the  greatest  evil  on  the  American  continent  was  not  inspired  from 
above. 

That  Sunday  seemed  to  be  a  good  Sunday  for  denouncing  bi- 
metallists.  Rev.  Thomas  Dixon,  Jr.,  at  the  Academy  of  Music,  New 
York,  said: 

I  am  not  going  to  talk  partisan  politics  this  morning.  I  am  going  to  stick 
close  to  the  Bible.  Thou  shalt  not  steal.  After  thirteen  years  of  study  of 
sociology,  I  must  confess  that  I  do  not  know  very  much  about  it,  but  I  do 
know  honesty  from  dishonesty.  I  may  not  understand  the  technique  of  finance, 
but  I  do  understand  results.  Any  hen  may  lay  an  egg,  and  while  I  may  not 
know  the  technique  by  which  that  egg  is  laid,  I  seriously  maintain  that  I  am 
a  better  judge  of  eggs  than  all  the  hens  in  the  country.  And  I  know  honesty 
from  dishonesty  as  well  as  any  financier.  The  proposition  that  the  nation  shall, 
independently  of  every  consideration  of  honesty,  take  53  cents'  worth  of  silver 
and  coin  it  into  a  dollar,  and  force  every  one  by  its  authority,  backed  up  by  its 
armies,  to  accept  it  as  such — that  is  the  proposition  which  is  put  before  us.  For 
whose  benefit,  in  God's  name?  For  that  of  the  millionaire  silver  mine  owner. 
The  ratio  of  16  to  i  is  not  only  a  false,  dishonest  one,  but  demagogues  have 
used  the  phrase  to  make  the  ignorant  believe  all  sorts  of  things.  Why,  down  in 
Virginia,  where  I  live,  there  are  some  who  believe  that  the  election  of  Bryan 
means  that  every  man  is  to  get  a  present  from  the  Government  of  sixteen  dol- 
lars. One  man  at  the  next  station  called  at  the  Adams  Express  office  to  inquire 
whether  his  sixteen  dollars  would  be  delivered,  or  if  he  would  have  to  call  for 
it.  A  man  has  been  arrested  in  New  Jersey  and  now  lies  in  jail,  awaiting  the 
action  of  the  grand  jury,  for  the  crime  of  passing  trade  dollars,  containing  the 
stamp  of  the  Government — dollars  with  more  silver  in  them  than  there  is  in 
Mr.  Bryan's  dollar.  Technically  his  crime  is  uttering  a  counterfeit,  because  the 
Government  has  not  guaranteed  to  pay  a  dollar  for  those  dollars.  Now  they 
want  to  coin  a  dollar,  and  make  you  take  it  whether  you  have  sense  or  not, 
which  is  no  dollar  at  all,  only  fifty-three  cents.  In  other  words,  the  Govern- 
ment is  to  go  into  the  counterfeiting  business.  I  am  not  talking  politics  but 
going  back  to  Moses.  It  is  a  gigantic  jest  to  say  that  the  value  of  silver  will 
rise  by  the  passage  of  the  free  silver  law.  It  did  not  rise  when  the  mine  owners 
forced  a  servile  government  to  buy  first  two  millions  of  their  product  a  month. 


474  kELlGlON  AND  POLITICS  MIXED. 

and  afterward  four  and  a  half  millions.  Even  if  silver  did  rise,  the  purchasing 
power  would  go  down.  In  either  case  the  value  of  labor  would  be  reduced  one- 
half.  Mr.  Bryan  is  impaled  on  one  or  the  other  of  these  two  horns  of  a  dilem- 
ma. If  free  silver  becomes  the  law,  $600,000,000  worth  of  gold  will  disappear 
from  circulation.  That  is  contraction.  A  panic  will  follow.  Mr.  Bryan 
admits  it.  He  says  we  need  heroic  action.  The  only  way  to  save  the  nation 
from  a  panic,  according  to  him,  is  to  give  it  another  one.  "Thou  shalt  not 
steal."  We  have  borrowed  money,  and  we  have  given  the  pledge  of  seventy 
million  people  that  we  shall  repay  it.  If  I  borrowed  from  the  devil  in  hell,  it 
would  be  the  part  of  honesty  to  pay  him  back  in  as  good  coin  as  that  he  loaned 
me.  If  those  who  loan  to  us  in  our  distress  are  as  black  as  they  are  painted, 
if  they  are  thieves  and  Shylocks,  we  are  still  under  obligations  to  pay  back  to 
them  as  good  money  as  we  got. 

The  New  York  World,  of  October  5,  in  speaking  of  the  sermon 
dcHvered  by  Mr.  Dixon  the  day  before,  said : 

When  he  called  Bryan  "a  mouthing,  slobbering  demagogue,  whose  patriot- 
ism was  all  in  his  jaw-bone,"  the  audience  howled. 

September  27th,  Dr.  Talmag-e,  in  a  sermon  delivered  at  his  church 
in  Washington,  said: 

This  country  has  been  for  the  most  part  passing  through  crises,  and  after 
each  crisis  it  is  better  off  than  before,  and  now  we  are  at  another  crisis.  We 
are  told  on  the  one  hand  that  if  gold  is  kept  as  a  standard  and  silver  is  not  ele- 
vated, confidence  will  be  restored,  and  this  nation  will  rise  triumphantly  from  all 
the  financial  misfortunes  that  have  been  afflicting  us.  On  the  other  hand,  we 
are  told  that  if  the  free  coinage  of  silver  is  allowed  all  the  wheels  of  business 
will  revolve,  the  poor  man  will  have  a  better  chance,  and  all  our  industries  will 
begin  to  hum  and  rear. 

During  the  last  six  Presidential  elections  I  have  been  urged  to  enter  the 
political  arena,  but  I  never  have  and  never  will  turn  the  pulpit  in  which  I  preach 
into  a  political  stump.  Every  minister  must  do  as  he  feels  called  to  do,  and  I 
will  not  criticise  him  for  doing  what  he  considers  his  duty;  but  all  the  political 
harangues  from  pulpits  from  now  until  the  third  of  November  will  not  in  all 
the  United  States  change  one  vote. 

But  good  morals,  honesty,  loyalty.  Christian  patriotism  and  the  ten  com- 
mandments— these  we  must  preach.  If  ever  this  country  needed  the  divine 
rescue,  it  needs  it  now.  Never  within  my  memory  have  so  many  people  literally 
starved  to  death  as  in  the  past  few  months.  Have  you  noticed  in  the  news- 
papers how  many  men  and  women  here  and  there  have  been  found  dead,  the 
post  mortem  examination  stating  that  the  cause  of  death  was  hunger?  There  is 
not  a  day  when  we  do  not  hear  the  crash  of  some  great  commercial  establish- 
ment, and  as  a  consequence  many  people  are  thrown  out  of  employment. 
AmAg  what  we  considered  comfortable  homes  have  come  privation  and  close 
calculation,  and  an  economy  that  kills.  Millions  of  people  who  say  nothing 
about  it  are  at  this  moment  at  their  wits'  end. 

There  are  millions  of  people  who  do  not  want  charity,  but  want  work. 
The  cry  has  gone  up  to  the  ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabbaoth  and  the  prayer  will  be 


RELIGION  AND  POLITICS  MIXED.  475 

heard  and  relief  will  come.  If  we  have  nothing  better  to  depend  upon  than 
American  politics,  relief  will  never  come.  Whoever  is  to  be  elected  to  the  Pres- 
idency, the  wheels  of  Government  turn  so  slowly,  and  a  caucus  in  yonder  white 
building  on  the  hill  may  tie  the  hands  of  any  President. 

As  I  said  before,  our  cause  was  supported  by  ministers  and  laymen 
of  all  denominations,  Catholic  and  Protestant,  but  I  quote  some  of  the 
hostile  criticisms  in  order  to  show  the  feeling  of  bitterness  which 
existed  in  some  quarters. 

While  it  was  not  unpleasant  to  be  so  severely  censured  from  the 
pulpit,  I  recall  the  fact  that  on  every  question  ministers  have  differed 
from  each  other;  their  arguments  must  stand  upon  their  own  merits 
and  their  political  opinions  must  be  measured  by  the  same  rules  by 
which  we  measure  the  political  opinions  of  others. 


CHAPTER  XXXVI. 


FROM  PHILADELPHIA  TO  BROOKLYN. 

TUESDAY  was  devoted  to  a  forenoon  meeting  at  Chester,  Pa., 
an  afternoon  meeting  at  Washington  Park,  N.  J.,  and  an 
evening  meeting  at   Philadelphia.     A   drizzling   rain   inter- 
fered somewhat  with  the  first  meeting. 

The  New  Jersey  meeting  was  largely  attended  by  truck  farmers. 
Senator  Tillman  and  Hon.  John  T.  Wright,  candidate  for  Congress, 
accompanied  me  on,  this  occasion.  The  evening  meeting  at  the  Acad- 
emy of  Music  was  one  of  the  memorable  meetings  of  the  campaign. 
The  hall  was  filled  at  an  early  hour,  and  the  streets  adjacent 
were  so  crowded  that  it  was  difficult  to  reach  the  hall.  In  order  to 
leave  the  hotel  unnoticed  we  made  our  exit  through  the  cellar,  then 
went  down  a  back  alley  and  entered  the  hall  at  a  rear  door,  but  not 
without  a  great  deal  of  difficulty.  Chairman  Carman,  of  the  State 
committee,  presided.     Below  will  be  found  a  portion  of  the  speech: 

Philadelphia  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  Fellow  Citizens:  The  gold  standard 
papers  ask  why  I  come  to  Pennsylvania.  I  have  nothing  to  conceal;  I  will  tell 
you  why  I  come.  I  come,  first,  to  secure,  if  possible,  the  electoral  vote  of  the 
State  of  Pennsylvania.  If  you  withhold  that  vote  and  we  are  defeated  in  this 
campaign,  then  I  come  upon  another  mission,  and  that  is  to  tell  the  people 
of  Pennsylvania  that  the  agitation  for  free  silver  will  never  cease  in  this 
country  until  the  gold  standard  is  driven  back  to  England. 

You  call  it  the  "silver  craze,"  and  say  that  it  is  dying  out.  You  may  apply 
such  epithets  as  you  like,  but  the  silver  cause  will  not  die,  because  truth  never 
dies.  You  ask  me  why  I  know  that  this  cause  is  right.  I  could  give  you  many 
reasons,  but  one  reason  is  sufficient — that  every  enemy  of  good  government 
is  against  free  silver.  You  can  know  a  cause,  as  you  know  an  individual,  by 
the  company  it  keeps,  and  our  cause  appeals  to  the  masses  of  the  people  because 
the  masses  are  interested  in  equal  laws.  Our  cause  is  opposed  by  those  who 
want  to  use  the  Government  for  profit,  for  gain;  because  we  are  opposed  to  the 
use  of  government  for  such  purposes. 

Your  city  is  called  Philadelphia,  the  City  of  Brotherly  Love.  I  come  to 
proclaim  to  you  the  gospel  that  is  described  by  the  name  of  your  city,  and  yet 
it  is  said  that  you  will  give  100,000  majority  against  such  a  doctrine.  I  want 
to  preach  financial  independence   in  the   city  which   saw  the  Declaration   of 

476 


FROM  PHILADELPHIA   TO  BROOKLYN.  477 

Indegendence  signed.  Do  you  say  that  this  city,  in  which  the  forefathers 
gathered  when  they  were  willing  to  defy  all  foreign  powers  and  declare  their 
political  independence,  is  afraid  to  favor  financial  independence?  I  shall  not 
say  that  of  the  descendants  of  the  forefathers  of  lOO  years  ago  unless  you  say 
so  in  the  ballot  which  you  cast  next  November. 

The  issue  raised  now  was  raised  then.  There  were  people  then  who  said 
that  the  colonies  could  not  get  along  unless  some  foreign  nation  was  looking 
after  them.  The  people  who  loo  years  ago  declared  in  favor  of  foreign 
supremacy  were  people  who  had  business  dealings  with  foreign  houses,  and  who, 
in  this  country,  acted  as  the  agents  of  the  people  who  employed  them  over  there. 
It  is  true  today.  You  have  your  banks  in  this  city  today  controlled  by  influences 
in  London,  and,  my  friends,  I  have  no  more  respect  for  the  American  who  takes 
his  patriotism  from  Lombard  street  today  than  they  had  lOO  years  ago  for  the 
tory  who  took  his  patriotism  from  the  same  place. 

One  of  the  papers  said  that  I  "lacked  dignity."  I  have  been  looking  into 
the  matter,  and  have  decided  that  I  would  rather  have  it  said  that  I  lacked 
dignity  than  to  have  it  said  that  I  lack  backbone  to  meet  the  enemies  of  the 
Government  who  work  against  its  welfare  in  Wall  street.  What  other  Presi- 
dential candidates  did  they  ever  charge  with  lack  of  dignity?  (A  voice:  "Lin- 
coln.") Yes,  my  friends,  they  said  it  of  Lincoln.  (A  voice:  "Jackson.")  Yes, 
they  said  it  of  Jackson.  (A  voice:  "And  JefTerson.")  Yes,  and  of  Jefferson; 
he  was  lacking  in  dignity,  too.  Now,  I  will  tell  you  how  dignified  a  man  ought 
to  be,  because,  you  know,  everybody  has  his  idea  of  these  things.  I  think  a 
man  ought  to  be  just  dignified  enough — not  too  dignified — and  not  lacking 
in  dignity.  Now,  it  might  be  more  dignified  for  me  to  stay  at  home  and  have 
people  come  to  see  me;  but  you  know  I  said  I  was  not  going  to  promise  to 
give  anybody  an  ofificc,  and,  therefore,  a  great  many  people  who  might  go  to  see 
a  candidate  under  some  circumstances  would  not  come  to  see  me  at  all.  And 
then,  too,  our  people  do  not  have  money  to  spare.  Why,  our  people  are  the 
people  who  want  more  money,  and  if  they  could  come  all  the  way  to  Nebraska 
to  see  me,  it  might  show  that  they  have  money  enough  now. 

I  do  not  like  to  be  lacking  in  any  of  the  essentials,  but  I  cannot  see  that 
there  is  any  lack  of  dignity  shown  if  I  come  before  the  people  and  talk  to  them 
and  tell  them  what  I  stand  for  and  what  I  am  opposed  to. 

They  say  I  am  begging  for  votes.  Not  at  all.  I  never  asked  a  man  to 
vote  for  me.  In  fact,  I  have  told  some  people  to  vote  against  me;  that  is  more 
than  some  candidates  do.  I  have  said  that  if  there  was  anybody  who  believed 
the  maintenance  of  the  gold  standard  absolutely  essential,  he  ought  not  to  vote 
for  me  at  all. 

If  I  can  prevent  the  maintenance  of  the  gold  standard,  you  can  rely  upon 
my  doing  it  upon  the  very  first  opportunity  that  the  people  will  give  me.  My 
position  on  public  questions  is  known,  and  I  do  not  use  thf  words  "sound 
money  when  I  mean  gold,  either;  and  I  do  not  use  the  words  "honest  money" 
when  I  talk  about  the  most  dishonest  money  that  this  country  ever  saw,  a  gold 
dollar  that  gets  bigger  all  the  time. 

My  platform  sets  forth  certain  propositions,  and  it  states  that  the  money 
question  is  the  paramount  issue;  and  then  two  other  parties,  to  neither  of  which 
I  ever  belonged,  declared  in  national  convention  that  the  money  question  is 


478  FROM  PHILADELPHIA   TO  BROOKLYN. 

paramount,  and  they  nominated  nie;  and  every  man  who  is  supporting  me  is 
willing  to  say  why  he  does  so. 

******* 

After  describing  the  manner  in  which  bonds  were  issued  to  obtain 
gold,  and  gold  drawn  out  to  pay  for  bonds,  I  said : 

That  is  what  they  call  financiering  on  Wall  street.  I  believe  that  the  only 
thing  in  the  Bible  which  some  of  these  financiers  ever  read  is  the  passage  which 
says  that  about  1800  years  ago  certain  wise  men  came  from  the  East.  They 
seem  to  think  that  the  wise  men  have  been  coming  from  that  direction  ever  since. 

Speaking  of  that  plank  in  our  platform  which  condemns  gold  con- 
tracts, I  said: 

We  have  usury  laws  saying  that  a  man  cannot  collect  more  than  a  certain 
rate  of  interest.  The  theory  underlying  the  usury  laws  is  found  in  the  Book 
of  Proverbs — that  the  borrower  is  servant  to  the  lender.  In  these  transactions 
men  do  not  always  stand  upon  an  equal  footing,  and,  therefore,  the  Government 
steps  in  to  protect  the  weaker  from  having  his  rights  trespassed  upon. 

If  it  is  right  to  say  that  no  man  shall  be  permitted  to  collect  more  than 
a  certain  rate  of  interest,  it  is  right  for  the  Government  to  say  when  it  has 
declared  a  certain  kind  of  money  to  be  legal  tender,  that  no  man  shall  write 
a  contract  saying  that  that  law  is  a  lie. 

They  talk  about  gold  as  if  it  were  divine.  It  is,  in  the  sense  that  it  is  their 
god.  But  it  is  not  divine;  it  is  matter.  Instead  of  being  a  real  god,  and  a  thing 
to  be  worshiped,  we  are  told  that,  when  the  children  of  Israel  made  it  into  a 
calf,  and  began  to  worship  it,  it  displeased  God,  and  he  ground  the  calf  into 
powder. 

An  outdoor  meeting  was  held  some  blocks  away,  but  the  crowd 
was  so  large  as  to  be  unmanageable.  The  Item,  one  of  the  best  silver 
papers  in  the  East,  was  largely  instrumental  in  making  the  Phila- 
delphia meeting  a  success.  Hon.  Wharton  Barker  assisted  the  Demo- 
crats in  arranging  this  meeting,  and  I  may  add  here  that  his  paper, 
The  American,  supported  the  ticket  with  great  earnestness  and'  in- 
telligence. I  met  here  Mr.  John  J.  Maloney,  City  Chairman  Cur- 
ley  and  others,  with  whom  I  first  became  acquainted  at  a  Jack- 
son Day  banquet  some  years  before. 

National  Committeeman  Johnson  Cornish,  of  New  Jersey,  a  col- 
league in  Congress,  met  us  at  Philadelphia,  and  took  charge  of 
the  party  through  his  State  the  next  day.  Senator  Daly  was  also 
one  of  the  party.  On  another  page  will  be  found  a  snap-shot 
taken  at  Phillipsburg,  where  a  large  number  of  railroad  men  were 
collected.  One  of  the  largest  crowds  of  the  day  was  found  at  Wash- 
ington, the  home  of  Mr.  Cornish.  Here  I  met  ex-Congressman  Fow- 
ler, who  was  one  of  the  few  Eastern  silver  men  in  the  House,  and  ex- 
Congressman  Dunn.  Washington  is  quite  a  manufacturing  place,  and 


FROM  PHILADELPHIA   TO  BROOKLYN.  479 

I  found  that  many  of  the  employes  were  working  only  a  portion  of  the 
time,  which  led  me  to  suggest  that  under  the  gold  standard,  the  labor- 
ing men  worked  half  time  and  the  farmers  worked  double  time — the 
laboring  men  not  finding  employment  for  the  whole  time,  and  the  farm- 
ers being  compelled  to  work  overtime  in  order  to  keep  up  with  taxes 
and  interest.  We  passed  through  Morristown,  where  we  met  one  of  the 
most  fashionable  audiences  encountered  on  the  trip;  evidences  of 
wealth  were  apparent  on  every  hand.  The  train  only  stopped  for  a 
moment,  and  my  speech  was  brief: 

Morristown  Speech. 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  In  a  city  like  this,  where  there  are  so  many 
evidences  of  plenty  of  money,  I  do  not  know  whether  you  understand  or  feel 
the  need  of  more  money.  But  I  want  you  to  remember  that  all  the  wealth  of 
this  country  is  first  derived  from  those  who  toil,  and  that  you  cannot  destroy 
the  prosperity  of  those  who  produce  the  wealth  without  undermining  the 
foundation  upon  which  all  society  rests. 

Remember  that  a  financial  system  that  commends  itself  to  the  wealthy  only 
is  a  curse  to  any  land. 

Remember  that  until  wealth  is  produced  it  cannot  be  divided,  and  that  if 
you  make  it  unprofitable  for  people  to  invest  their  money  in  enterprises  you 
lessen  the  production  of  wealth. 

At  Orange,  Mr.  Thomas  A.  Edison  took  a  picture  of  the  crowd 
and  moving  train;  the  views  secured  have  since  been  exhibited 
throughout  the  country  by  means  of  the  vitascope. 

Passing  through  Newark  and  Hoboken  we  reached  Brooklyn 
before  dark.  Here  I  was  the  guest  of  Mr.  Willis  J.  Abbot,  of  the 
New  York  Journal,  whose  splendid  editorial  work  during  the  cam- 
paign would  have  endeared  him  to  me,  even  if  he  had  not  been  an 
old-time  friend.  The  first  meeting  was  held  in  the  Academy  of  Music, 
and  the  audience  was  full  of  enthusiasm.  I  quote  from  the  speech 
delivered  here: 

Brooklyn  Speech. 

Before  addressing  myself  to  the  money  question  I  desire  to  say  some- 
thing in  regard  to  the  planks  of  our  platform  which  have  been  assailed  by  the 
enemy.  I  only  speak  of  them  because  persons  high  in  Republican  councils 
have  called  attention  to  them  and  sought  to  twist  them  into  a  meanmg 
never  intended,  and  to  give  them  an  interpretation  which  they  will  not  bear. 
Let  me  read  to  you  the  plank  of  the  Democratic  platform  against  which 
so  much  abuse  has  been  leveled. 

We  denounce  arbitrary  interference  by  Federal  authorities  in  lo»al  affairs  as  a 
violation  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  a  crime  against  free  institutions. 

That  is  the  part  which  they  say  is  bad.    When  did  that  beconfe  bad?    Let 


480  FROM  PHILADELPHIA   TO  BROOKLYN. 

me  reed  you  a  plank  of  another  platform,  and  see  how  this  plank  which  I 
am  about  to  read  compares  with  the  one  which  I  have  just  read: 

That  the  maintenance  inviolate  of  the  rights  of  the  State,  and  especially  the 
right  of  each  State,  to  order  and  control  its  own  domestic  institutions  according  to 
its  own  judgment  exclusively,  is  essential  to  that  balance  of  power  upon  which  the 
perfection  and  endurance  of  our  political  fabric  depends;  and  we  denounce  the 
lawless  invasion  by  armed  force  of  the  soil  of  any  State  or  Territory,  no  matter  under 
what  pretext,  as  among  the  gravest  of  crimes. 

Do  you  know  from  what  platform  that  plank  is  taken?  (A  voice — "Abra- 
ham Lincoln's.")  Yes,  it  is  from  Abraham  Lincoln's  platform.  That  is  a 
plank  in  the  platform  of  the  Republican  party  in  i860.  And  when  you  com- 
pare our  plank  with  that,  you  will  find  that  ours  is  mild  in  language.  Abraham 
Lincoln  ran  for  President  on  that  platform;  he  was  elected  President  on  that 
platform,  and  in  his  inaugural  address  he  quoted  that  plank  in  full  and  gave 
it  his  approval.  Now,  my  friends,  if  our  platform  is  wrong,  I  want  these  Re- 
publicans to  repudiate  Abraham  Lincoln,  and  if  they  take  Abraham  Lincoln 
from  the  Republican  party  they  take  from  it  its  most  sacred  memory. 

Now,  let  me  call  your  attention  to  another  thing  which  they  complain 
of.  They  say  we  criticise  the  Supreme  court.  Let  me  read  you  what  we  say 
on  this  subject: 

But  for  this  decision  by  the  Supreme  Court  (speaking  of  the  decision  on  the 
incomie  tax),  there  would  be  no  deficit  in  the  revenue  under  the  law  passed  by  a 
Democratic  Congress  in  strict  pursuance  of  the  uniform  decisions  of  that  court  for 
nearly  one  hundred  years,  that  court  having  in  that  decision  sustained  Constitutional 
objections  to  its  enactment  which  had  previously  been  overruled  by  the  ablest  judges 
who  have  ever  sat  on  that  bench.  We  declare  that  it  is  the  duty  of  Congress  to  use 
all  the  Constitutional  power  which  remains  after  that  decision,  or  which  may  come 
from  its  reversal  by  the  court  as  it  may  hereafter  be  constituted,  so  that  the  burdens 
of  taxation  may  be  equally  and  impartially  laid,  to  the  end  that  wealth  may  bear  its 
their  Government  into  the  hands  of  the  eminent  tribunal. 

We  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  court  overruled  the  decision  of  a' 
hundred  years.  That  is  a  fact.  Have  we  not  a  right  to  mention  a  fact? 
We  declare  that  Congress  should  use  all  the  Constitutional  power  which  re- 
mains. Let  them  insist,  if  they  will,  that  having  taken  away  a  part,  we  dare 
not  use  what  is  left. 

We  demand  that  Congress  shall  use  such  power  as  may  come  from  a  reversal  by 
the  court  as  it  may  hereafter  be  constituted. 

Has  no  court  hereafter  a  right  to  reverse  the  decision  of  this  court?  If 
not,  what  right  had  his  court  to  reverse  former  decisions?  The  Supreme  court 
changes  from  time  to  time.  Judges  die  or  resign,  and  new  judges  take  their 
places.  Is  it  not  possible,  my  friends,  that  future  judges  may  adhere  to  the 
precedents  of  a  hundred  years,  instead  of  adhering  to  a  decision  rendered  by  a 
majority  of  one?  When  did  our  opponents  find  that  a  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  was  so  sacred?  "Kiis  decision  would  not  have  been  rendered  but  for  the 
fact  that  the  men  who  had  to  pay  the  income  tax  attacked  the  decision  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  asked  this  court  to  overturn  a  former  decision.  Every  time 
a  lawyer  goes  into  court  and  asks  for  a  reversal  of  a  decision  of  the  court — 
and  it  is  not  an  infrequent  thing — he  attacks  the  correctness  of  the  decision 
which  he  desires  to  have  reversed.  Let  me  read  to  you  what  the  Republican 
platform  said  about  a  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  i860: 


FROM  PHILADELPHIA   TO  BROOKLYN.  481 

We  brand  the  recent  opening  of  the  African  slave  trade  under  the  cover  of 
our  national  flag,  aided  by  perversions  of  judicial  power,  as  a  crime  against  hu- 
manity and  a  burning  shame  to  our  country  and  age. 

That  is  what  the  platform  said.  It  declared  that  a  certain  decision  of  the 
court  was  a  perversion  of  judicial  power.  There  is  no  language  in  our  platform 
which  is  so  severe  on  the  Supreme  Court  as  that  Republican  platform. 

On  these  two  questions  we  are  assailed  by  the  Republicans  today.  We 
have  not  taken  as  emphatic  a  stand  as  the  Republican  party  took  in  the 
first  platform  on  which  it  elected  a  President  of  the  United  States.  Let  me 
read  to  you  now  what  Abraham  Lincoln  said  about  the  Supreme  Court. 
This  is  not  a  party  platform,  nor  is  it  an  extract  from  a  speech  uttered  upon 
the  spur  of  the  moment.  I  read  to  you  from  a  State  paper — from  the  inaugural 
address  of  Abraham  Lincola: 

I  do  not  forget  the  position  assumed  by  some  that  Constitutional  questions  are 
to  be  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court;  nor  do  I  deny  that  such  decisions  must  be 
binding  in  any  case  upon  the  parties  to  the  suit  as  to  the  object  of  that  suit,  while 
they  are  also  entitled  to  very  high  respect  and  consideration  in  all  parallel  cases  by 
all  other  departments  of  the  Government.  At  the  same  time  the  candid  citizen  must 
confess  that  if  the  policy  of  the  Government  on  vital  questions  affecting  the  whole 
people  is  to  be  irrevocably  fixed  by  the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court,  the  instant 
they  are  made  In  ordinary  litigation  between  parties  in  personal  action  the  people 
will  have  ceased  to  be  their  own  rulers,  having  to  that  extent  practically  resigned 
heir  Government  into  the  hands  of  the  eminent  tribunal. 

Mr.  Lincoln  says  that  if  it  is  moant  to  be  asserted  that  the  Supreme  Court 
has  a  right  to  determine  the  policy  of  the  people  on  great  questions,  then 
the  people  will  have  resigned  our  Government  into  the  hands  of  the  Supreme 
Court.  Nothing  in  our  platform  is  as  harsh  as  the  language  of  Abraham  Lin- 
coln. We  do  not  criticise  that  court  as  he  criticises  it — and  remember  that 
when  he  used  the  words  which  I  have  quoted  he  was  President. 

I  quote  these  authorities,  my  friends,  that  you  may  see  how  far-fetched 
is  the  criticism  which  is  directed  against  us.  I  quote  these  things  to  show  you 
that  the  people  who  use  the  criticism  against  us  must,  in  order  to  do  so, 
abandon  the  Republican  platform  upon  which  Lincoln  was  elected.  But  I 
must  apologize  for  having  quoted  Abraham  Lincoln  as  Republican  authority. 
He  is  no  longer  a  Republican  authority.  Abraham  Lincoln  believed  in  a 
government  of  the  people,  by  the  people  and  for  the  people,  and  that  is  not 
Republicanism  in  this  campaign. 

Our  opponents  say  we  are  opposed  to  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  but  the 
fact  is  that  many  of  our  opponents  are  afraid  that  the  law  will  be  enforced. 
They  reminfl  me  of  the  man  in  court.  He  seemed  to  be  uneasy,  and  when 
the  judge  assured  him  that  he  would  get  justice  in  that  court,  he  replied: 
"Great  Heavens,  Judge,  that's  what  I  am  afraid  of." 

Let  me  read  to  you  what  a  distinguished  Democrat  once  said: 

They  say  that  we  are  trying  to  destroy  our  institutions.  We,  who  now  ad- 
dress you,  have  been  the  peculiar  objects  of  these  imputations.  We  pause,  therefore,  for 
a  moment  to  repel  them.  We  entertain  no  sentiments  adverse  to  social  order;  we 
seek  not  to  destroy,  but  to  preserve  in  their  purity  the  institutions  of  our  country. 

Whose  language  do  you  suppose  that  is?  That  is  the  language  which 
Samuel  J.  Tilden  used  many  years  ago  in  addressing  the  farmers,  workingmen 
and   mechanics.     They   accused   reformers   then    of   being   disturbers    of   the 


482  FROM  PHILADELPHIA   TO  BROOKLYN. 

peace,   and  he  asserted  then  as   we  now   assert  that  the  purpose  is  not  to 
destroy,  but  to  save  the  Government  which  we  love. 

They  had  just  such  a  contest  in  those  days  as  we  have  now.  Let  me  read 
again  from  Mr.  Tilden's  speech: 

A  powerful  moneyed  corporation  engaged  in  a  death  struggle  with  a  government 
to  whom  it  owed  its  existence  assailed  the  purity  of  our  press.  A  mighty  com- 
bination of  politicians  and  moneyed  interests  is  again  in  the  field  to  control  elections, 
to  change  the  administration  of  government,  and  to  re-establish  the  supremacy  of 
the  great  moneyed  corporations  over  the  business  of  the  country. 

My  friends,  if  he  had  Hved  today  he  could  not  have  described  the  op- 
position to  the  free  coinage  of  silver  in  more  accurate  terms  than  he  then 
described  the  moneyed  interests.  He  also  said  that  by  their  control  of  the 
currency  they  spread  far  and  wide  dismay,  misery  and  ruin,  in  order  to  ex- 
tort a  renewal  of  the  powers  and  privileges  which  they  then  enjoyed  from  the 
fears  and  necessities  of  the  community.  That  same  moneyed  power  exists 
today,  and  it  is  doing  the  same  work  today  that  it  did  then,  and  business  men 
are  terrified.  Men  who  owe  money  are  threatened  with  bankruptcy  unless 
they  sell  their  citizenship.  If  a  banker  dares  to  have  an  opinion  of  his  own, 
he  is  menaced  with  ruin.  Your  banker  tells  you  what  you  must  do,  and 
his  banker  tells  him  what  he  must  do,  and  you  can  trace  it  all  back  to 
the  great  money  center  in  England,  and  from  that  center  those  who  corner 
the  money  of  the  world  reach  out  and  threaten  to  lay  a  paralyzing  hand  on 
all  the  industry  of  the  world  if  the  people  dare  to  have  opinions  of  their 
own.  Tilden  said  that  the  patriotic  firmness  of  a  virtuous  people  prevailed  in 
that  struggle.  I  believe  that  the  patriotism  and  firmness  of  a  patriotic  peo- 
ple will  prevail  in  this  struggle.  To  think  otherwise  would  be  to  despair  of  a 
government  like  this.  We  cannot  have  a  free  government  unless  the  people  are 
free  to  act.  If  a  majority  of  the  people  must  obtain  consent  from  a  few 
people  before  they  can  act,  then  thef^  are  agents,  not  sovereigns,  and  wq 
have  a  democracy  merely  in  form — and  a  plutocracy  in  fact,  which  is  the  worst 
form  of  government. 

Let  me  read  another  extract  from  Mr.  Tilden: 

Banded  together  by  the  same  unity  of  Interests,  arraying  them  in  an  or- 
ganized mass  which  acts  and  operates  through  all  the  ramifications  of  society,  con- 
stituting property  by  monopoly  and  perpetuities,  and  binding  to  it  political  power. 
It  has  established  an  aristocracy  more  potent,  more  permanent  and  more  oppressive 
than  any  other  which  has  ever  existed— such  is  the  dynasty  of  associated  and  privileged 
wealth,  which  is  the  ruling  power  at  present  in  nearly  every  civilized  nation. 

I  repeat  his  words  today.  A  government  by  associated  wealth,  a  govern- 
ment by  corporation,  is  the  most  tyrannical  government  that  any  people  can 
suffer  from. 

Judge  William  J.  Gaynor  presided  at  this  meeting,  and  Hon. 
James  G.  Bell,  chairman  of  the  Kings  County  Democratic  Committee, 
Hon.  Bernard  J.  York,  and  many  other  prominent  citizens  occupied 
seats  pn  the  platform. 

After  a  brief  speech  at  the  overflow  meeting,  just  outside  of  the 
hall,  I  went  to  the  Claremont  rink  and  addressed  a  large  audience  of 


.  PROM  PHILADELPHIA   TO  BROOKLYN.  483 

laboring  men  who  had  assembled.     The  hour  was  late  and  the  speech 
was  not  long. 

Here  and  on  several  other  occasions  I  referred  to  the  Bismarck 
letter,  which  was  widely  circulated,  especially  among  the  German 
speaking  portion  of  our  people.  As  there  has  been  some  discussion  in 
regard  to  the  English  version  of  it,  I  give  below  the  translation  which 
appeared  in  the  Cincinnati  Weekly  Enquirer  of  October  8th.  The  let- 
ter, which  was  drawn  out  by  an  inquiry  addressed  to  him  by  Governor 
Charles  A.  Culberson,  of  Texas,  July  i,  reads  as  follows: 

The  Bismarck  Letter. 

Friedrichsruhe,  August  24,    1896. 

To  His  Excellency,  Mr.  Charles  A.  Culberson,  Governor  of  Texas,  Austin, 
Texas,  U.  S.  A. — Honored  Sir:  Your  esteemed  writing  of  July  i,  of  this  year, 
I  have  received. 

I  have  always  had  a  preference  for  bimetallism,  without  considering  myself 
infallible  over  against  experts  on  the  subject,  while  I  was  in  office,  and  I  believe 
today  it  is  commendable  to  bring  about  an  agreement  between  the  nations 
chiefly  engaged  in  the  world's  commerce  in  the  direction  of  bimetallism. 

The  United  States  are  commercially  freer  in  their  movements  than  any 
single  one  of  the  European  nations,  and  if  North  America  should  find  it  com- 
patible with  its  interests  to  take  an  independent  step  in  the  direction  of  bimetal- 
lism I  do  believe  it  would  have  appreciable  influence  upon  the  establishment 
of  international  agreement  and  the  conjunction  of  the  European  States.  With 
the  assurance  of  my  most  distinguished  esteem,  I  am  Your  Excellency's  most 
devoted  servant.  V.  Bismarck. 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

THURSDAY  a  committee  consisting  of  Editor  Alexander  Troop 
and  Mr.  C.  S.  Bennett,  of  New  Haven,  William  Kennedy 
and  other  representatives  from  the  Nutmeg  State  took  our 
party  in  charge,  and  the  journey  through  New  England  began. 

The  first  stop  was  made  at  Bridgeport,  where  a  brief  speech  was 
delivered  in  the  public  square.  Here  we  were  met  by  Hon.  John 
B.  Sargent  of  New  Haven,  late  Democratic  candidate  for  Governor. 

We  arrived  at  New  Haven  shortly  after  noon.  The  Yale  incident 
made  this  the  best  advertised  meeting  held  in  New  England.  A  num- 
ber of  the  college  boys  insisted  on  showing  their  disapproval,  be- 
ginning before  I  had  a  chance  to  say  anything.  I  give  the  speech, 
with  interruptions,  as  it  appeared  in  the  New  York  Journal  of  the 
next  morning: 

Yale  College  Incident. 

I  am  glad  that  there  are  students  here,  because  I  want  to  say  a  word  to 
students.  Your  college  has  helped  to  add  fame  to  your  city,  and  those  who 
assemble  here  are  supposed  to  come  in  order  that  they  may  better  equip  them- 
selves for  the  duties  of  life.  I  am  glad  to  talk  to  students,  because,  my  friends, 
we  have  a  cause  which  appeals  to  students.  If  the  syndicates  and  corporations 
rule  this  country,  then  no  young  man  has  a  fair  show  unless  he  is  the  favorite 
of  a  corporation.  (Applause — and  j'ells  for  McKinley  by  a  cordon  of  the 
students.)  If  the  people  have  a  right  to  govern  themselves  and  exercise  that 
right,  then  every  citizen  has  an  equal  chance  and  every  man  may  achieve  what 
he  desires.  We  wish  to  leave  all  the  avenues  open  so  that  the  son  of  the 
humblest  citizen  may  aspire  to  the  highest  position  within  the  gift  at  the 
people.     (Applause  and  yells  repeated.) 

I  am  not  speaking  now  to  the  sons  who  are  sent  to  college  on  the  proceeds 
of  ill-gotten  gains.  (Enthusiastic  applause.)  I  wil  wait  until  these  sons  have 
exhausted  what  their  fathers  have  left  them  and  then  appeal  to  their  children  who 
will  have  to  commence  life  where  their  grandfathers  commenced.  (Great  ap- 
plause.) My  friends,  a  just  government  is  best  for  the  great  masses  of  the 
people.  Equal  laws  and  equal  opportunities  are  best  for  nine  out  of 
every  ten  of  us.  (Yells  again  repeated.)  Therefore,  our  cause  appeals  to 
every  young  man  who  wants  to  make  this  Government  so  good  as  to  deserve 
the  love,  confidence  and  the  support  of  every  citizen  in  this  land. 

We  appeal  not  only  to  the  students;  we  appeal  to  business  men  who  have 
been   terrorized  by  the   financial — what   may   I    call   it?     (Applause.)     People 

484 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND.  465 

have  been  tyrannized  over  by  financial  institutions  until  in  some  instances 
it  is  more  dangerous  to  raise  your  voice  against  the  ruling  power  than  it  is  in 
an  absolute  monarchy.  (Great  applause  and  yells.)  If  there  is  anybody  who 
loves  this  sort  of  thing  then  I  shall  offend  him  by  speaking  of  it,  but  I  shall  not 
offend  any  man  who  loves  liberty  and  the  right  of  free  speech  in  this  country. 
(Great  applause.)  • 

The  business  men  have  been  told  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  would  ruin 
them.  If  it  can  ruin  them  with  more  rapidity  than  the  gold  standard  has 
ruined  them,  then,  my  friends,  it  will  be  bad,  indeed,  because  the  gold  stand- 
ard has  increased  the  number  of  failures  among  business  men,  and  every  step 

that  has  been  taken  has  been  followed (Yells  from  the  students.)     I  have 

been  so  used  to  talking  to  young  men  who  earn  their  own  living  that  I  do 

not  know (Great  applause  and  cheering.)     I  say,  I  have  been  so  used  to 

talking  to  young  men  who  earn  their  own  living  that  I  hardly  know  what 
language  to  use  to  address  myself  to  those  who  desire  to  be  known,  not 
as  creators  of  wealth,  but  as  the  distributers  of  wealth  which  somebody  else 
created.  (Great  applause  and  cheering.)  If  you  will  show  me  a  young  man 
who  has  been  taught  to  believe (More  yells  and  cries  of  "McKinley.") 

In  all  my  travels  I  have  not  found  a  crowd  that  needed  talking  to  so  much 
as  this  crowd  does.  (Cries  of  "That's  right.")  I  came  to  this  city  something 
more  than  a  year  ago,  and  I  then  learned  something  of  the  domination  of 
your  financial  classes.  I  have  seen  it  elsewhere,  but,  my  friends,  the  great 
mass  of  the  people  even  of  this  city,  will  be  better  oflf  under  bimetallism  that 
permits  the  nation  to  grow,  than  under  a  gold  standard  which  starves  every- 
body except  the  money  changer  and  the  money  owner. 

We  sometimes  out  West  are  mstructed  by  your  insurance  companies.  I 
carry  insurance  in  old  line  companies  and  in  what  are  known  as  the  mutual 
or  assessment  companies.  I  carry  insurance  in  fraternal  organizations  like  the 
United  Workmen  and  the  Modern  Woodmen,  as  well  as  in  the  old  line  com- 
panies, and  I  am  glad  that  my  assessment  companies  are  satisfied  to  take  my 
money  and  give  me  insurance  without  attempting  to  tell  me  how  I  must  vote. 
Your  old  line  companies  have  seen  fit  to  insult  the  intelligence  of  the  people 
by  attempting  to  exercise  a  guardian  care,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  we  are 
able  to  look  after  ourselves  without  their  instructions. 

You  have  laboring  men  also  in  large  numbers  in  this  city.  I  do 
not  know  whether  the  advocates  of  the  gold  standard  here  who  employ  men 
in  the  shops  insist  upon  telling  their  employes  how  to  vote.  I  have  in  other 
places  found  employers  who  would  put  in  envelopes  the  pay  for  the  day's  work 
or  week's  work,  and  then  print  on  the  outside  of  the  envelopes  some  in- 
structions to  the  employes.  If  the  manufacturer,  employer,  or  railroad  presi- 
dent feels  that  there  must  be  something  on  the  outside  of  the  envelope  as  well 
as  upon  the  inside,  let  him  write  on  the  outside:  "You  will  find  within  your 
wages.  They  are  to  cover  your  work.  We  recognize  that  the  men  who  have 
sense  enough  to  do  the  work  we  want  done  have  sense  enough  to  vote  right, 
without  our  telling  them  how  to  vote." 

I  notice  that  in  some  places  they  have  been  organizing  sound  money  clubs, 
and  they  have  the  applicant  sign  a  statement,  saying  that  the  free  coinage  of 
silver  would  hurt  him  in  his  business  as  a  wage  earner.     I  have  wondered 


486  IM  NEW  ENGLAND. 

why  our  great  financial  magnates  do  not  put  in  their  application  a  statement 
similar  to  that.  Why  don't  the  heads  of  these  syndicates  which  have  been 
bleeding  the  Government  make  application  to  sound  money  clubs  and  write  in 
the  application  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  would  hurt  them  in  their  busi- 
ness as  heads  of  syndicates?  They  want  people  to  believe  that  they  are 
entirely  benevolent,  that  they  are  philanthropists,  and  that  what  they  do  is  done 
merely  because  they  believe  that  the  people  will  be  benefitted  by  having 
them  run  the  Government,  and  they  submit  to  the  inconvenience  of  running 
the  Government  in  order  to  help  the  people,  who,  they  say,  will  be  bene- 
fited.    (More  confusion  and  applause  by  the  students.) 

Why  is  it  that  the  broker  or  the  bond  buyer  does  not  write  in  his  applica- 
tion that  he  has  a  personal  interest  in  the  gold  standard?  Why  is  it  that  these 
men  want  to  throw  upon  the  wage  earners  whatever  odium  there  may  be  in 
using  his  vote  to  protect  his  personal  interests?  I  believe  the  wage  earner, 
and  the  farmer,  and  the  business  man,  and  the  professional  man,  all  of  these 
will  be  benefited  by  a  volume  of  money  sufficient  to  do  business  with.  If  you 
make  money  scarce  you  make  money  dear.  If  you  make  money  dear  you  drive 
down  the  value  of  everything,  and  when  you  have  falling  prices  you  have  hard 
times.  And  who  prosper  by  hard  times?  There  are  but  few,  and  those  few  are 
not  willing  to  admit  that  they  get  any  benefit  from  hard  times.  No  party  ever 
declared  in  its  platform  that  it  was  in  favor  of  hard  times,  and  yet  the  party 
that  declares  for  a  gold  standard  in  substance  declares  for  a  continuation  of 
hard  times. 

Here  a  band  which  had  been  playing  for  a  drill  in  another  part  of 
the  square  came  nearer  and  made  talking  more  difficult,  and  my  voice 
not  being  in  good  condition  I  concluded  my  remarks  by  saying: 

It  is  hard  to  talk  when  all  the  conditions  are  favorable,  and  I  must  ask 
you  to  excuse  me  from  talking  any  further  in  the  presence  of  the  noises  against 
which  we  have  to  contend  today. 

I  have  since  learned  that  some  misunderstood  my  closing  words, 
and  thought  I  again  referred  to  the  students,  but  this  is  an  error.  They 
were  making  no  disturbance  when  I  finished  speaking.  I  did  not  even 
mean  to  criticise  the  band,  because  I  was  sure  that  the  interruption  was 
not  intentional,  but  my  voice  being  hoarse  and  the  crowd  large,  it  was 
difficult  to  make  myself  heard  even  when  there  was  perfect  quiet. 

The  incident  gave  rise  to  a  good  deal  of  public  discussion. 

A  few  papers  criticised  my  language  on  that  occasion  and  declared 
that  my  words  provoked  the  hostile  demonstration.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  hostiHty  was  manifested  before  I  began  to  speak,  and  it  was 
some  minutes  before  I  could  obtain  a  hearing.  This  is  the  only 
speech  in  which  I  have  inserted  the  applause,  and  it  is  only  done  here 
because  the  interruptions  are  also  quoted.  The  report  is  reproduced 
exactly  as  it  appeared  at  the  time  in  order  that  the  reader  may  form 
his  own  opinion  upon  the  subject. 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND  487 

The  following  press  dispatch  appeared  in  the  morning  papers  of 
September  30: 

Yale  Students  Criticised. 

Muskogee,  I.  T.,  Sept.  29. — At  a  mass  meeting  of  the  Cherokees,  Creeks, 
Choctaws  and  Seminoles,  held  here  yesterday,  the  following  resolution  was 
unanimously  adopted: 

Resolved,  that  we  contemplate  with  deep  regret  the  recent  insulting  treatment  ot 
William  J.  Bryan  by  students  of  a  college  in  the  land  of  the  boasted  white  man's  civiliza- 
tion, and  we  admonish  all  Indians  who  think  of  sending  their  sons  to  Yale  that  association 
with  such  students  could  but  prove  hurtful  alike  to  their  morals  and  their  progress  toward 
the  higher  standard  of  civilization. 

The  Sun  Defends  the  Yale  Students, 

The  New  York  Sun  came  to  the  defense  of  the  boys  in  an  edi- 
torial, from  which  the  following  is  an  extract : 

What  did  these  students  really  do?  On  the  day  that  Yale  University  opened 
its  new  college  year,  Bryan  came  to  New  Haven  and  prepared  to  address  a 
great  crowd  at  the  green  adjacent  to  which  are  the  college  buildings  of  the 
center  of  university  life,  in  a  town  of  which  the  university  is  the  great  and 
distinguishing  feature.  The  students  gathered  in  strong  force,  as  was  natural. 
Practically  they  were  on  their  own  ground.  They  expressed  their  feelings  against 
repudiation  with  the  vigor  and  vociferousness  of  youth;  and  they  had  a  right 
to  do  it. 

They  ought  to  have  done  it;  and  the  sentiment  to  which  they  gave  utterance 
was  honorable  to  them.  The  boys  made  a  great  noise,  cheering  for  McKinley 
and  yelling  and  jeering  at  repudiation,  so  that  Mr.  Bryan  could  not  be  heard  for 
several  minutes.  If  they  had  applauded  him  incessantly  for  even  a  full  half  hour, 
would  there  have  been  any  complaint  of  their  preventing  him  from  starting  out 
in  his  speech?  Has  not  a  crowd  in  the  open  air  as  much  right  to  hiss  as  to 
cheer?  At  what  period  in  our  history  was  that  privilege  taken  from  Americans? 
These  dissenting  students,  the  reports  agree,  did  not  oflfer  any  personal  violence 
to  Mr.  Bryan  or  anybody  else.  They  did  not  throw  rotten  eggs  at  him  or  other- 
wise assail  his  dignity,  but  merely  shouted  their  college  cry  and  yelled  de- 
risively. They  did  not  like  the  cause  the  speaker  represented.  They  detested 
and  despised  both  it  and  him,  and  they  made  known  their  feelings  noisily. 

Acting  President  Wright's  Opinion. 

Prof.  Henry  P.  Wright,  acting  president  of  the  university,  in  a 
statement  the  next  day,  speaking  of  the  matter,  said: 

I  do  not  regard  the  matter  seriously,  because  I  am  sure  it  was  not  pre- 
meditated. Boys  will  be  boys,  j^ou  know,  and  it  was  really  nothing  more  than 
a  boyish  outbreak.  Students  are  forever  doing  such  things,  thoughtlessly 
enough  I  am  sure.  I  am  very  sorry  indeed  that  it  should  have  happened, 
for  it  places  the  university  in  a  false  light,  where  the  antics  of  college  boys  are 
not  understood. 


488  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

My  Own  Opinion. 
Upon  reflection  I  took  the  same  view  of  it  that  Prof.  Wright  did, 
and  on  ray  return  said  to  the  crowd  assembFed  at  the  New  Haven 
depot : 

Do  not  criticise  the  Yale  boys  too  harshly.  I  am  not  inclined  to  criticise 
them  as  severely  as  some  others  have.  Having  been  a  college  boy  myself,  I 
attribute  their  interruption  more  to  youthful  exuberance  than  to  any  intention 
to  interfere  with  free  speech.  I  shall  always  be  glad  to  return  to  New  England 
when  circumstances  permit,  and  am  certain  that  whatever  may  be  my  subject, 
I  shall  find  persons  here  who  are  willing  to  listen,  even  if  they  do  not  agree. 

In  the  evening  a  meeting  was  held  in  the  Capitol  grounds  at  Hart- 
ford, and  later'I  addressed  a  crowd  in  front  of  the  hotel.  The  follow- 
ing is  an  extract  from  the  first  speech: 

Hartford  Speech. 

I  am  glad  to  talk  to  the  people  of  the  capital  city  of  Connecticut.  I  know 
that  in  coming  here  I  come  to  meet  many  who  are  not  in  sympathy  with 
the  cause  which  I  represent,  and  to  meet  some  who  are  too  intolerant  even  to 
consider  the  merits  of  the  cause.  Error  alw^ays  shuns  the  light,  and  those  who 
are  enjoying  that  which  is  wrong  are  never  willing  that  the  people  shall  hear 
the  right. 

Your  financiers  sometimes  assume  that  they,  and  they  only,  understand  a 
question  like  the  money  question.  I  want  to  read  to  you  what  Senator  Fessen- 
den  once  said  about  the  knowledge  of  financiers  upon  the  money  question. 
You  will  find  the  quotation  in  a  speech  made  by  him  at  a  time  when  the  legal 
tender  laws  were  being  discussed. 

Nobody  knows  much  upon  the  question  of  finance,  not  even  those  who  are  most 
familiar  with  it;  for,  sir,  I  declare  today  that,  in  the  whole  number  of  learned  financial 
men  that  I  have  consulted,  I  never  have  found  any  two  of  them  who  agree,  and  therefore 
It  is  hardly  worth  while  for  us  to  plead  any  very  remarkable  degree  of  ignorance  when 
nobody  is  competent  to  instruct  us;  and  yet  such  is  the  fact.  I  can  state  to  you,  Mr. 
President,  that  on  one  day  I  was  advised  very  strongly  by  a  leading  financial  man  at 
all  events  to  oppose  this  legal  'tender  clause.  He  exclaimed  against  it,  with  all  the  bitter- 
ness in  the  world.  On  the  very  same  day  I  received  a  note  from  a  friend  of  his,  telling 
me  that  we  could  not  get  along  without  it.  I  showed  it  to  him,  and  he  expressed  his  utter 
surprise.  He  went  home,  and  next  day  telegraphed  to  me  that  he  had  changed  his 
mind  and  now  thought  it  was  absolutely  necessary;  and  his  friend  who  wrote  me  wrote 
again  that  he  had  changed  his — and  there  were  two  of  the  most  eminent  financial  men 
of  the  country. 

There  you  have  the  testimony,  not  of  a  Western  man,  but  of  an  Eastern 
Senator.  I  call  your  attention  to  this  quotation  because  your  financiers  speak 
with  all  the  assurance  of  men  who  receive  their  knowledge  direct  from  some 
higher  source.  The  fact  is,  that  the  Western  farmer  who  hes  felt  the  pinch 
of  the  gold  standard  has  a  clearer  understanding  of  what  it  means  than  the 
man  down  here  who  has  not  sufTered  from  the  system. 

Never  in  the  history  of  the  world  has  reform  come  to  mankind  from 
those  who  derive  a  benefit  from  the  vicious  system  to  be  reformed.  Those  who 
are  not  suffering  do  not  study  the  conditions,  nor  do  they  seek  a  remedy. 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND.  489 

Your  city  is  noted  for  its  great  insurance  companies,  and  the  insurance 
companies  are  taking  an  active  part  in  the  battle  to  continue  the  gold 
standard.  Is  it  not  worth  while  lor  these  companies  to  consider  the  interests 
of  the  rest  of  the  people?  The  presidents  of  these  companies  are  more  con- 
cerned about  their  own  salaries  than  they  are  in  protecting  the  policy  holders 
from  the  effects  of  free  coinage. 

Another  thing:  The  people  know  that  the  insurance  companies  have  a 
greater  objection  to  the  Chicago  platform  than  is  found  to  free  coinage. 
That  platform  declares  in  favor  of  an  income  tax,  and  these  insurance 
companies  claim  the  protection  of  the  Government,  while  they  are  un- 
wiUing  to  pay  taxes  to  support  the  Government  which  protects  them.  They 
secure  large  incomes;  they  enjoy  prosperity;  they  go  into  United  States  courts 
and  there  seek  protection,  and  then  they  want  to  place  upon  less  fortunate 
people  all  the  burdens  of  government.  If  the  presidents  of  these  insurance 
companies  would  assume  the  responsibilities  which  belong  to  them,  and  con- 
sent to  pay  their  just  share  of  the  taxes  of  the  Federal  Government,  they 
would  be  more  respected  by  the  people  generally. 

Some  of  our  opponents  pretend  to  be  afraid  that  the  election  of  the 
Chicago  ticket  will  interfere  with  property  rights.  I  would  not  take  from 
those  who  have  a  single  dollar  of  their  possessions;  I  would  not  take  or 
destroy  one  iota  of  happiness  which  they  enjoy,  but  I  believe  that  the  safety  of 
our  Government  requires  the  setting  of  limits  to  greed  and  the  putting  of  a 
check  upon  avarice,  so  that  those  who  have  will  not  monopolize  all  the  avenues 
of  industry  and  shut  out  of  employment  those  who  desire  to  have. 

Of  all  the  instrumentalities  which  have  been  conceived  by  the  mind  of  man 
for  transferring  the  bread  which  one  man  earns  to  another  man  who  does  not 
earn  it,  I  believe  the  gold  standard  is  the  greatest.  The  gold  standard,  by  its 
silent  process  of  taking  from  the  value  of  property  and  adding  to  the  value 
of  dollars,  is  making  the  rich  richer  and  the  poor  poorer.  And  when  the 
poor  complain,  those  who  are  benefited  by  the  system  turn  upon  them,  call 
them  a  mob,  dispute  their  intelligence,  and  even  question  their  right  to  par- 
ticipate in  the  government  of  the  country. 

Leaving  Hartford  early  in  the  morning,  a  short  ride  brought  us 
to  Springfield,  Mass.,  where  the  first  meeting  of  the  day  was  held. 
The  following  is  an  extract  from  the  speech  delivered  in  the  public 
park: 

Springfield  Speech. 

Before  entering  upon  a  discussion  of  the  paramount  issue  of  this  cam- 
paign, I  desire  in  this  city  to  pay  a  tribute  to  independent  journalism.  I  have 
always  respected  an  honest,  earnest  and  able  opponent.  I  have  never  criticised 
the  right  of  any  one  to  speak  his  sentiments  and  present  his  ideas  as  clearly, 
as  forcibly  and  as  eloquently  as  he  can.  I  believe  with  Jefferson  that  error 
is  harmless  where  reason  is  left  free  to  combat  it — and  if  any  man  has  an  idea, 
I  am  willing  for  him  to  launch  that  idea  and  trust  to  the  merits  of  that  idea 
to  make  its  way  into  the  mind  and  into  the  hearts  of  men.  I  respect  the 
Springfield  Republican  for  the  high  plane  upon  which  it  discusses  political 
questions.    I  respect  it  for  the  tolerance  which  it  shows  to  political  opponents. 


490  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

and,  without  censuring  those  who  substitute  abuse  for  argument,  I  can  com- 
mend those  who  use  argument  instead  of  abuse. 

I  can  commend  also  to  every  citizen  the  words  of  that  distinguished 
editor  who  was  the  founder  of  this  paper.  I  am  told  that  he  is  the  author 
of  the  expression  that  a  man  who  is  not  willing  to  die  for  a  cause  in  which 
he  believes  is  not  worthy  to  live. 

It  is  the  willingness  of  the  people  to  stake  their  all  upon  the  correctness 
of  their  convictions  that  has  enabled  truth  to  spread  from  person  to  person, 
until  it  at  last  overcomes  all  opposition.  And  in  this  campaign  we  have  as 
good  an  illustration  as  was  ever  given  of  depth  of  conviction  and  intensity  of 
earnestness  in  the  presentation  of  a  cause.  I  challenge  you  to  find  in  all  the 
political  contests  through  which  this  country  has  passed  a  single  contest 
which  has  aroused  more  earnestness  than  this  contest  through  which  we  are 
now  passing.  I  challenge  you  to  find  among  all  the  hosts  who  have  defended 
a  cause  more  earnest  men  than  are  found  today  among  the  advocates  of  the 
right  of  this  Government  to  legislate  for  itself,  without  regard  to  other  nations. 
It  will  not  do  to  say  that  there  is  no  cause  for  such  feeling  as  is  manifested 
now.  If  you  read  the  dispatch  from  London  which  appeared  in  yesterday 
morning's  paper  you  will  find  that  a  great  meeting  of  agriculturists  was  held 
at  Buda  Pesth,  and  in  speaking  of  that  meeting  the  dispatch  said  that  practically 
all  of  those  representing  agricultural  societies  were  in  favor  of  the  restora- 
tion of  bimetallism. 

My  friends,  our  opponents  sometimes  tell  us  that  this  movement  in  favor 
of  free  coinage  is  started  by  the  mine  owners  and  kept  up  by  the  mine  owners. 
I  want  them  to  understand  that  they  cannot  explain  this  great  uprising  of  the 
people  on  the  theory  that  it  is  instigated  by  men  wITo  own  bullion  and  want  to 
sell  it  at  a  higher  price.  This  uprising  comes  from  the  masses  of  the  people, 
who  do  not  produce  bullion,  but  they  produce  property,  and  they  realize  that 
the  gold  standard  has  been  driving  value  out  of  the  property  which  they 
produce. 

The  opposition  may  well  afTord  to  pause  in  their  ridicule  of  the  advocates 
of  free  coinage  and  in  their  denunciation  of  them  as  lawless  characters,  to 
find  out  whether  there  is  a  well-founded  reason  for  this  advocaey  of  bimetallism 
among  the  farmers  of  the'  United  States,  of  England,  of  Germany,  of  France, 
and  of  every  other  nation  which  has  been  cursed  by  the  gold  standard. 

My  friends,  I  assert  here,  and  I  challenge  any  gold  paper  to  dispute  it, 
that  a  financial  policy  which  is  injurious  to  the  agricultural  classes  has  nothing 
to  commend  it  to  the  government  of  any  nation. 

The  gold  standard  has  never  commended  itself  to  the  agricultural  classes 
of  any  country  which  has  ever  had  it.  What  will  you  say,  then?  Will  you 
say  that  these  farmers  have  no  right  to  have  their  interests  respected?  No,  you 
dare  not  say  that,  because,  my  friends,  they  must  first  produce  wealth  before 
there  is  wealth  to  be  distributed.  What  will  you  say,  then?  Will  you  say 
that,  having  the  right  to  have  their  interests  respected,  they  have  not 
the  intelligence  to  know  what  is  best  for  them?  No,  you  dare  not  say  that, 
because  you  know  that  in  public  life  and  in  business  life  the  best  brains  that 
you  have  come  from  the  farms  of  this  country. 

What  answer  will  you  make  to  them?    When  they  ask  for  bread,  will  you 


IM  NEW  ENGLAND.  491 

give  them  a  stone?  When  they  ask  for  fish,  will  you  bestow  serpents  upon  them? 
That  has  been  the  policy  of  the  financiers  of  this  country,  and,  assuming  their 
own  unselfishness,  they  have  been  attempting  to  force  their  ideas  upon  others, 
while  others  have  fallen  down  beneath  the  weight  of  these  ideas  and  the 
financiers  themselves  have  risen  to  prosperity  on  the  prostrate  forms  of  the 
fallen. 

No  person  can  accuse  me  of  attempting  to  deny  to  the  financiers  or  even 
to  the  money  changers  the  right  to  their  opinions,  the  right  to  their  votes, 
or  the  right  to  every  legitimate  influence.  What  I  deny  to  them  is  the  right 
to  think  for  anybody  but  themselves,  the  right  to  act  for  anybody  but  themselves, 
the  right  to  put  themselves  above  other  people  and  go  through  the  world 
crying  "I  am  holier  than  thou;  I  am  holier  than  thou." 

My  friends,  let  me  give  you  one  way  by  which  you  can  determine  the 
sincerity  of  men.  It  is  not  a  new  rule.  It  is  as  old  as  the  law  of  evidence. 
It  applies  to  all  walks  of  life,  to  all  conditions  and  to  all  subjects.  The  man 
who  believes  he  is  right  tells  you  what  he  believes,  and  why  he  believes  it. 
The  man  who  does  not  believe  that  he  is  right  is  the  man  who  has  filled 
the  dictionary  with  ambiguous  terms  and  who  fills  his  speech  with  words  of 
double  meaning. 

The  man  who  talks  about  "sound  money"  and  then  refuses  to  tell  you 
what  "sound  money"  means,  can  only  get  a  certificate  of  honesty  from  himself. 
If  the  advocates  of  "sound  money"  believed  that  their  money  was  good  they 
would  tell  you  that  by  "sound  money"  they  meant  a  gold  standard.  I  asked  a 
man  why  it  was  that  he  was  opposed  to  using  the  word  "gold"  in  the  platform. 

"Well,"  he  said,  "we  have  found  an  unreasonable  prejudice  against  the 
word  gold,  and,  therefore,  it  is  to  avoid  that  prejudice  that  we  use  the  phrase 
sound  money." 

My  friends,  the  people  have  no  prejudice  against  gold,  but  they  have  a 
prejudice  against  a  system  that  is  based  upon  gold  and  does  not  furnish  the 
gold  when  people  want  it. 

There  is  one  advantage  in  being  a  bimetallist.  You  can  like  gold  and 
silver  both,  while  a  gold  standard  man  does  not  dare  to  like  silver,  and  he 
does  not  get  much  gold  to  like. 

A  man  told  me  that  out  of  nearly  $1,000,000  collected  in  taxes  at  Hartford, 
Conn.,  less  than  $100  was  collected  in  gold.  Our  opponents  tell  us  they  want 
sound  money,  but  they  want  a  financial  system  built  upon  an  invisible  founda- 
tion. Do  you  call  that  soundness,  my  friends?  If  you  do,  you  must  write 
a  new  meaning  for  soundness  and  have  soundness  defined  as  that  which  is 
dangerous. 

Our  opponents  talk  about  honest  money,  and  yet,  my  friends,  they  never 
touch  upon  the  purchasing  power  of  a  dollar  in  defining  what  is  an  honest 
dollar.  They  tell  us  that  they  want  good  money.  My  friends,  there  are 
two  things  that  we  need  in  money.  Money  must  have  quantity  as  well  as 
quality.  We  must  have  money  which  we  can  get  hold  of.  If  money  is  so 
good  that  you  can  pray  for  it  and  long  for  it,  but  can  never  see  it  except  when 
you  have  the  privilege  of  gazing  through  some  grated  door  and  looking  at 
somebody  else's  pile,  then  it  is  too  good  for  the  masses  of  the  people. 

Money  ought  not  to  be  built  on  the  balloon  plan.     Balloons  are  built  to 


492  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

go  up,  and  the  higher  they  go  the  better  they  are  as  balloons;  but  if  dollars 
are  built  on  that  plan,  the  higher  they  go  the  greater  is  the  misery  that  they 
bring  to  mankind. 

Our  opponents  want  a  balloon  dollar.  Our  opponents  want  a  dollar  that 
gets  higher  an^  higher  all  the  time.  If  we  are  going  to  have 
a  gold  standard,  if  we  are  going  to  have  a  dollar  whose  appetite 
is  never  satisfied,  a  gold  dollar  which  insists  upon  eating  more 
of  the  products  of  toil  every  year,  we  ought  to  change  the  dies  at  the  mint 
and  so  stamp  that  dollar  that  people  will  understand  it.  Let  us  take  off  the 
emblems  that  have  adorned  it  from  the  beginning  and  put  on  one  side  the 
picture  of  the  horse  leech,  and  under  the  picture  let  it  be  written,  as  in 
Proverbs,  "Give,  Give,  Give;"  and  on  the  other  side  of  the  gold  dollar  let  us 
put  the  picture  of  an  open  grave,  and  above  it  let  us  write,  as  in  Proverbs, 
■'It  sayeth  not,  it  is  enough." 

My  friends,  that  is  the  sort  of  dollar  that  the  goW  standard  has  given  us. 
That  is  the  sort  of  dollar  that  the  gold  standard  will  continue  to  give  us.  If 
oats  get  down  to  ten  cents  a  bushel  it  means  that  $i  will  buy  ten  bushels  of 
oats,  and  if  that  dollar  is  not  good  enough  you  can  send  its  value  up  until 
$1  will  buy  twenty  bushels  of  oats,  and  if  the  farmer  is  getting  too  much  money 
for  his  oats,  you  can  still  send  it  up  higher  so  that  it  will  take  lOO  bushels  of 
oats  to  buy  a  dollar.  You  can  make  the  dollar  as  dear  as  you  want  to, 
and  the  dearer  you  make  it  the  worse  it  is  for  everybody  except  the  owners 
of  fixed  investments  and  the  men  who  sell  bonds  to  the  Government  after 
having  driven  the  Government  into  the  position  where  it  wants  to  buy  the 
bonds. 

When  they  talk  of  a  gold  standard  I  always  think  of  what  Lincoln  said 
when  a  man  once  asked  him  how  he  liked  a  certain  speech.     He.  replied: 

"Anybody  who  would  like  that  sort  of  a  speech  would  be  very  much 
pleased  with  it."  I  find  that  the  people  who  like  the  gold  standard  are  very 
much  pleased  with  it,  but  I  am  glad  to  know  that  the  number  of  people 
who  like  the  gold  standard  is  growing  less  every  day,  even  in  New  England. 

Truth  compels  me  to  admit  that  all  of  the  gold  papers  were  not 
as  courteous  in  their  Criticisms  as  the  Republican — for  instance,  the 
Louisville  Courier- Journal,  after  the  meeting  at  that  place: 

Louisville  Courier-Journal  Editorial. 

Mr.  William  J.  Bryan  has  come  to  Kentucky,  and  Kentuckians  have  taken 
his  measure.  He  is  a  boy  orator.  He  is  a  dishonest  dodger.  He  is  a  daring 
adventurer.  He  js  a  political  fakir.  He  is  not  of  the  material  of  which  the 
people  of  the  United  States  have  ever  made  a  President,  nor  is  he  even  of  the. 
material  of  which  any  party  has  ever  before  made  a  candidate. 

The  New  York  Tribune,  after  the  election,  said  editorially: 

New  York  Tribune  Editorial. 
The  thing  was  conceived  in  iniquity  and  was  brought  forth  in  sin.     It  had 
its  origin  in  a  malicious  conspiracy  against  the  honor  and  integrity  of  the  na- 


m  NEW  ENGLAND.  493 

tion.  It  gained  such  monstrous  growth  as  it  enjoyed  from  an  assiduous  cuhure 
of  the  basest  passions  of  the  least  worthy  members  of  the  community.  It  has 
been  defeated  and  destroyed  because  right  is  right  and  God  is  God.  Its  nom- 
inal head  was  worthy  of  the  cause.  Nominal,  because  the  wretched,  rattle-pated 
boy,  posing  in  vapid  vanity  and  mouthing  resounding  rottenness,  was  not  the 
real  leader  of  that  league  of  hell.  He  was  only  a  puppet  in  the  blood-imbued  hands 

of ,  the  anarchist,  and ,  the  revolutionist,  and  other  desperadoes  of  that 

stripe.  But  he  was  a  willing  puppet,  Bryan  was,  willing  and  eager.  Not  one 
of  his  masters  was  more  apt  than  he  at  lies  and  forgeries  and  blasphemies  and  all 
the  nameless  iniquities  of  that  campaign  against  the  Ten  Commandments.  He 
goes  down  with  the  cause,  and  must  abide  with  it  in  the  history  of  infamy.  He 
had  less  provocation  than  Benedict  Arnold,  less  intellectual  force  than  Aaron 
Burr,  less  manliness  and  courage  than  Jefiferson  Davis.  He  was  the  rival  of 
them  all  in  deliberate  wickedness  and  treason  to  the  Republic.  His  name  be- 
longs with  theirs,  neither  the  most  brilliant  nor  the  most  hateful  in  the  list. 
Good  riddance  to  it  all,  to  conspiracy  and  conspirators,  and  to  the  foul 
menace  of  repudiation  and  anarchy  against  the  honor  and  life  of  the  Republic. 

The  reader  may  be  interested  in  knowing  the  worst  that  has  been 
said,  and  I  have  tried  to  gratify  that  desire.  If  any  paper  was  more 
virulent  and  venomous  than  the  Tribune,  its  remarks  escaped  my  at- 
tention. 

Hon.  George  Fred  WilHams  joined  us  at  this  place,  and  it  gratified 
me  to  meet  a  man  who  was  as  bitterly  assailed  as  myself.  The  main 
stop  between  Springfield  and  Boston  was  made  at  Worcester. 

The  Boston  reception  was  a  very  pleasant  surprise.  I  had  ex- 
pected to  find  some  determined  silver  men  there,  because  the  minority 
is  always  compelled  to  fortify  itself  for  a  contest  with  superior  num- 
bers, but  the  enthusiasm  was  beyond  my  expectations.  The  crowd 
followed  the  carriage  from  the  depot  to  the  American  House,  and 
shouted  all  the  way.  I  here  met  Mr.  Sewall,  and  with  him  attended 
a  modest  little  banquet  given  by  the  Massachusetts  BimetaUic  Union. 
Mr.  S.  W.  Nickerson  presided,  and  among  those  present  were  Robert 
Treat  Payne,  Jr.,  a  descendant  of  a  signer  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, and  Messrs.  Brooks  Adams  and  John  Quincy  Adams,  de- 
scendants of  two  Presidents.  Hon.  E.  Moody  Boynton  delivered  an 
eloquent  address,  to  which  I  responded  as  follows: 

Boston  Speech — At  Banquet. 

I  desire  to  express  thanks  for  the  kindly  words  spoken  in  praise  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  Mississippi  valley.  You  appreciate  their  intelligence,  piety  and 
patriotism.  We  recognize  that  to  a  large  extent  we  are  the  descendants  of 
those  who  began  our  nation's  history  here,  and  if  we  do  not  all  have  in  our 
veins  the  blood  of  the  Revolutionary  sires,  we  all  share  with  you  the  spirit 
which  they  bequeathed  to  the  entire  country. 


494  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

It  is  more  than  gratifying  to  find  here  in  Boston  so  many  who  are  in  hearty 
accord  with  the  sentiments  expressed  in  the  Chicago  platform.  From  reading 
some  of  your  papers  I  had  almost  expected  to  find  the  majority  of  your  people 
looking  for  the  tea  in  order  that  they  might  return  it  to  the  mother  country. 
I  appreciate  what  has  been  said  in  regard  to  the  magnitude  of  this  struggle. 
It  is  a  great  struggle,  a  struggle  whose  importance  is  not  fully  realized  even  by 
many  who  are  fighting  with  us. 

It  was  said  by  one  of  your  great  men,  that  "Here  the  embattled  farmers 
stood,  and  fired  the  shot  heard  round  the  world." 

My  friends,  in  this  nation  today  the  embattled  farmers,  together  with  labor- 
ing men  and  business  men,  are  firing  a  shot  that  will  be  heard  round  the  world. 

I  do  not  take  unto  myself  the  words  which  are  spoken  in  praise,  because 
my  personality  is  lost  in  the  cause  for  which  I  at  this  time  stand. 

I  say  to  you  that  I  realize  the  immense  consequences  which  may  follow 
from  victory  or  defeat.  I  am  a  believer  in  Almighty  God,  and  my  prayer  is 
that  He  may  give  me  strength  to  bear  whatever  responsibilities  are  imposed 
upon  me,  and  wisdom  to  discharge  whatever  duties  fall  to  me. 

There  was  an  immense  multitude  in  attendance  at  the  meeting  on 
the  Common.    The  Boston  Globe,  speaking  of  it,  said: 

The  Globe's  Description  of  Boston  Common  Meeting. 
When  Mr.  Bryan  came  to  the  stand  at  the  Common  at  7:40  last  evening 
he  found  himself  in  view  of  an  audience  the  like  of  which  was  never  seen  in 
Boston  before.  It  swayed  and  surged  back  and  forth  as  far  as  one  could  see  into 
the  shadows  on  either  side.  Experienced  campaigners  were  amazed  at  the 
size  of  the  gathering,  and  their  estimates  of  the  number  there  showed  that  even 
those  who  were  accustomed  to  size  up  crowds  were  all  at  sea  on  this  one.  Some 
said  there  were  fifty  thousand,  and  others  said  there  were  one  hundred 
thousand. 

The  speech  here  was  brief  and  I  was  followed  by  Mr.  Sewall.  The 
main  speech  was  made  at  Music  Hall,  where  the  free  silver  Democrats 
spent  the  night  in  order  to  be  sure  of  admittance  to  the  State  con- 
vention on  the  following  day.  Below  will  be  found  a  portion  of  the 
speech  delivered  at  this  place. 

Boston  Speech — At  Music  HalL 

Mr.  Chairman:  I  esteem  it  a  great  privilege  to  be  permitted  to  speak  in 
this  city,  and  to  present  a  cause  in  which  I  believe,  among  the  people  who  have 
been  reported  to  be  hostile  to  it,  and  I  am  glad  to  present  that  cause  to  those 
who  are  about  to  furnish  an  evidence  of  their  devotion  which  is  not  often 
called  for. 

I  never  had  an  opportunity  to  address  those  who  kept  the  pass  at  Ther- 
mopylae. But  I  am  permitted  to  speak  to  those  who  are  going  to  keep  the 
pass  here. 

In  ordinary  times  it  would  not  be  necessary  for  those  who  believe  as  we  do 
to  resort  to  extraordinary  measures.  But,  my  friends,  we  are  passing  through 
an  unusual  campaign.  We  are  in  the  midst  of  an  unusual  struggle,  and  we 
have  to  meet  an  enemy  that  does  not  always  scruple  at  the  means  employed. 


in 

H 

< 


P 
H 


Pi 

w 

H 

W 
X 

u 
o 


IN  NBW  ENGLAND.  497 

I  have  known  something  of  the  advocates  of  the  gold  standard.  We  went 
through  this  contest  in  our  State  before  other  States  did.  I  got  acquainted  with 
the  genus  "gold  bug"  out  there. 

I  have  great  respect  for  Republicans.  I  have  great  respect  for  any  man 
who  has  an  opinion,  believes  in  a  thing,  stands  by  it,  and  tells  people  what  he 
believes  in.  I  have  great  respect  for  any  man  of  convictions,  I  care  not  how 
widely  he  may  differ  from  me.  As  I  desire  to  think  as  I  please,  I  concede  the 
right  to  every  one  to  think  as  he  pleases,  and  when  I  find  a  man  espousing  a 
cause  in  which  he  believes,  he  cannot  express  himself  so  emphatically  as  to  take 
from  me  the  respect  which  I  always  feel  toward  an  honest  opponent. 

But  there  is  one  thing  which  I  do  not  like,  and  there  is  one  thing  which 
I  do  not  hesitate  to  express  my  dislike  for,  and  that  is  for  a  man  who  has  a 
belief  and  dares  not  take  the  public  into  his  confidence. 

I  respect  the  advocate  of  a  gold  standard  who  says  he  is  for  a  gold  stand- 
ard and  will  try  to  secure  a  gold  standard.  I  cannot  say  so  much  for  the  man 
who  says  he  is  for  bimetallism  and  works  for  the  gold  standard  quietly. 

I  am  willing  to  meet  in  the  open  field  any  opponent  who  stands  for  a 
principle  and  a  candidate.  I  am  willing  to  meet  in  the  open  field  a  party  which 
adopts  a  platform,  nominates  candidates  upon  the  platform,  and  then  tries  to 
elect  candidates  on  that  platform. 

I  cannot  say  so  much  for  those  who,  having  been  defeated  in  a  fair  conven- 
tion, try  to  steal  the  name  "Democrat"  from  those  who  are  entitled  to  it,  and 
then  put  up  a  ticket  which  they  do  not  expect  to  vote  for. 

A  man  who  says  he  is  for  honest  money  and  nominates  a  ticket  for  the 
purpose  of  electing  another,  does  not  commence  at  the  right  place  to  prove 
his  honesty. 

I  have  had  something  to  do  with  gold  standard  Democrats.  I  have  seen 
them  in  Nebraska.  I  have  seen  them  beaten  at  the  primaries  and  beaten  in 
convention,  and  then  I  have  seen  them  resort  to  every  sort  of  deception  in  order 
to  elect  a  Republican,  and  therefore  I  am  prepared  for  all  sorts  of  underhand 
schemes.  I  am  prepared  for  all  sorts  of  work  in  the  dark;  and  when  we  have  to 
deal  with  men  who,  instead  of  fighting  an  open  fight,  are  always  seeking  to 
derive  some  underhand  advantage,  we  have  to  take  every  precaution.  We 
cannot  fight  them  as  we  would  others. 

I  am  glad  to  speak  in  this  State.  It  did  not  require  much  persuasion  to 
obtain  my  promise  to  come.  When  my  colleague  in  Congress,  who  was- 
opposed  to  me  at  every  step  on  thi^  money  question,  became  a  convert  to  free 
silver,  all  differences  between  us  on  that  subject  disappeared,  and  we  stood 
together,  and  when  he  came  to  Chicago  representing  at  least  a  part  of  the 
Democracy  of  ^fassachusetts — at  that  time  a  part — and  took  his  stand,  I  made 
up  my  mind  that  if  George  Fred  Williams  could  fight  for  free  coinage  against 
all  the  hostile  influences  of  the  Bay  State,  I  could  come  and  hold  up  his  hands 
while  he  did  battle. 

No  part  of  this  country  is  so  far  from  my  home  that  I  cannot  reach  it  if 
one  word  or  act  of  mine  can  give  encouragement  to  a  warrior  like  George  Fred 
Williams. 

I  know  something  of  the  embarrassment  which   surrounds  one  when  he 
takes  a  position  opposed  by  his  friends  and  acquaintances.     I  know  something 
28 


498  m  NEW  ENGLAND. 

of  the  bitterness  which  is  aroused  by  the  independence  that  is  shown  on  such 
occasions;  but,  my  friends,  it  has  been  the  history  of  every  cause  that  some 
had  to  stand  forth  and  take  the  abuse  as  they  blazed  the  way  where  multitudes 
followed  after. 

I  heard  some  one  say  that  when  one  person  saw  a  thing  he  was  a  fanatic; 
when  a  number  were  able  to  see  the  same  thing,  he  became  an  enthusiast;  and 
when  everybody  saw  it  he  became  a  hero. 

Two  months  ago  George  Fred  Williams  was  a  fanatic.  He  is  now  an 
enthusiast.  The  time  will  come  when  his  name  will  be  written  among  the 
heroes. 

An  audience  in  this  city  once  hissed  Wendell  Phillips,  but  they  did  not  hiss 
him  always,  and,  my  friends,  I  come  to  impress  upon  you  tonight  a  truth  which 
Wendell  Phillips  presented  more  eloquently  than  I  can.  I  am  going  to  quote 
the  words  of  Wendell  Phillips  to  you,  because  Wendell  Phillips  pointed  out 
the  very  dangers  which  confront  us  now. 

The  Democratic  platform  has  declared  in  favor  of  bimetallism  and  against 
the  gold  standard.  It  has  also  declared  against  the  issue  of  paper  money  by 
national  banks. 

The  gold  standard  and  national  bank  currency  go  together.  The  gold 
standard  allows  a  few  financiers  to  control  the  legal  tender  money,  and  the 
national  bank  system  allows  a  few  banks  to  control  the  paper  money;  and 
when  you  have  them  together  the  volume  of  your  currency  is  held  in  the 
hands  of  a  few,  who  can  expand  it  or  contract  it  at  will,  and  by  so  doing  enrich 
themselves  while  they  spread  disaster  among  those  who  are  subject  to  their 
control. 

Let  me  read  to  you  what  Wendell  Phillips  said  in  regard  to  the  control 
of  the  currency: 

In  other  words,  It  was  the  currency  which,  rightly  arranged,  opened  a  nation's  well 
springs,  found  work  for  willing  hands  to  do,  and  filled  them  with  a  just  return,  while  hon- 
est capital,  daily  larger  and  more  secure,  ministered  to  a  glad  prosperity.  Or  it  was  cur- 
rency, wickedly  and  selfishly  juggled,  that  made  merchants  bankrupt  and  starved  labor 
Into  discontent  and  slavery,  while  capital  added  house  to  house  and  field  to  field,  and  gath- 
ered Into  its  miserly  hands  all  the  wealth  left  in  a  ruined  land. 

The  first  question,  therefore,  in  an  industrial  nation  is,  where  ought  control  of  the 
currency  to  rest?  In  whose  hands  can  this  almost  omnipoteni  power  be  trusted?  Every 
writer  of  political  economy,  from  Aristotle  to  Adam  Smith,  allows  that  a  change  in  the 
currency  alters  the  price  of  every  ounce  and  yard  of  merchandise  and  every  foot  of  land. 
Whom  can  we  trust  with  this  despotism?  At  present  the  banks  and  the  money  kings 
wield  this  power.  They  own  the  yardstick,  and  can  make  it  longer  or  shorter,  as  they 
please.  They  own  every  pound  weight,  and  can  make  it  heavier  or  lighter  as  they  choose. 
This  explains  the  riddle,  so  mysterious  to  common  people,  that  those  who  trade  in  money 
always  grow  rich,  even  while  those  who  trade  In  other  things  go  into  bankruptcy. 

That  is  the  language  of  Wendell  Phillips,  and  Wendell  Phillips,  who  uttered 
those  words,  will  live  in  history  when  your  financiers  are  forgotten  and  their 
money  is  scattered  to  the  winds. 

Some  of  your  people  are  afraid  that  the  masses  are  not  competent  to  govern 
themselves.  Some  of  the  people  who  speak  here  through  your  press  and 
through  pamphlets  seem  to  be  very  much  afraid  that  you  have  among  you  an 
unthinking  class,  and  that  that  unthinking  class  is  lawless  in  disposition  and 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND.  499 

cannot  be  trusted  to  exercise  wisely  the  right  to  vote.     Let  me  read  you  what 
Phillips  said  on  that  subject.     Speaking  of  this  contest  he  said: 

It  began  when  Congress  declared  all  men  equal;  it  will  never  end  until  it  is  settled 
that  the  people  are  the  source  of  all  power  and  safely  to  be  trusted  with  its  exercise  over 
every  interest  and  in  every  direction.  On  the  one  side  stand  the  Tories  and  the  cowards, 
those  who  hate  the  people  and  those  who  honestly  doubt  their  capacity  and  discretion; 
on  the  other  side  we  see  the  men  who  still  believe  in  the  declaration  of  independence  and 
are  resolved  that  this  shall  be,  as  Lincoln  said,  a  "government  for  the  people,  by  the  peo- 
ple,  and   for   the  people." 

And  then  he  added: 

I  believe  In  the  people,  in  universal  suffrage  as  fitted  to  secure  the  best  results  that 
human  nature  leaves  possible.  If  corruption  seems  rolling  over  us  like  a  flood,  it  is  not  the 
corruption  of  the  humbler  classes — it  is  millionaires,  who  steal  banks,  mills  and  railways; 
It  is  defaulters,  who  live  in  palaces  and  make  way  with  millions;  it  is  money  kings,  who 
buy  up  Congress;  it  is  the  demagogues  and  editors  in  purple  and  fine  linen,  who  bid 
$50,000  for  the  Presidency  itself. 

My  friends,  Wendell  Phillips  believed  in  the  people.  The  advocates  of  the 
gold  standard  are  not  willing  to  submit  their  cause  to  the  people  and  fight  an 
open  fight  on  that  issue. 

Emerson,  wTiom  the  people  of  Massachusetts  will  have  as  much  reason  tp 
remember  as  they  will  have  to  remember  any  of  their  financiers,  also  spoke  on 
this  subject.  He  expressed  his  ideas  as  to  the  capacity  of  the  people  for  self- 
government.     Let  me  read  to  you  what  he  said: 

I  will  have  never  a  noble,   no  lineage  counted  great; 
Fishers  and  choppers  and  ploughmen  shall  constitute  a  State. 

He  was  not  afraid  to  trust  the  affairs  of  government  in  the  hands  of  those 
who  contribute  with  brain  and  muscle  to  the  nation's  wealth. 

If  your  financiers  were  to  rewrite  that  poem,  how  do  you  suppose  they 
would  write  it?     I  think  about  this  way: 

We  will  have  dukes,  lords  and  nobles,  with  lineage  counted  great; 
Bankers  and  brokers  and  bosses  shall  constitute  a  State. 

My  friends,  no  question  was  ever  settled  in  this  country  until  it  was  set- 
tled by  the  great  mass  of  the  people.  Financiers  never  settled  a  question. 
Politicians  never  settled  a  question.  Bosses  never  settled  a  question.  The 
voters  themselves  are  the  only  ones  who  can  settle  or  who  will  settle  any  great 
question. 

And  for  the  first  time  this  money  question  has  been  submitted  to  the  vote 
of  the  American  people.  Heretofore  the  two  great  parties  have  adopted  plat- 
forms very  similar,  and  where  they  did  not  get  their  platforms  exactly  alike 
they  corrected  the  mistake  by  getting  their  candidates  exactly  alike. 

The  same  influences  have  controlled  both  party  conventions,  and  have  nom- 
inated men  who  thought  the  same  on  platforms  substantially  alike. 

They  tried  it  this  year.  They  went  to  St.  Louis  and  they  wrote  a  platform. 
Your  newspapers  had  declared  that  gold  was  the  money  of  civilization.  Your 
newspapers  had  declared  that  we  had  outgrown  silver;  your  newspapers  had 
declared  that  there  could  not  be  two  yardsticks;  your  newspapers  had  declared 
that  bimetallism  was  simply  the  trick  of  the  man  who  owed  money  and  wanted 
to  pay  a  debt  in  cheap  dollars,  that  it  was  simply  the  device  of  the  mine  owner 
\vho  wanted  to  raise  the  value  of  his  silver  bullion,  and  that  it  was  the  doctrine 
of  the  demagogue,  who  advocated  it  to  get  votes. 


500  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

These  were  the  people  who  were  behind  the  gold  standard,  and  representa- 
tives of  those  who  thought  this  way  went  down  to  St.  Louis.  They  had  their 
own  way.  They  could  have  written  any  platform  they  wanted  to.  What  kind 
of  a  platform  did  they  write?  Is  there  anything  in  the  Republican  platform 
about  gold  being  the  only  money  fit  for  civilized  people  to  use?  Nothing  of 
that  kind.  Is  there  anything  there  condemning  the  two-yardstick  idea?  Not  a 
word.  Is  there  anything  there  condemning  any  man  as  a  demagogue  who 
believes  in  bimetallism?  Not  a  word  of  it.  Is  there  any  slander  upon  "debtors 
who  want  bimetallism  in  order  to  pay  their  debts  easily?"  Not  a  word  about 
that.  Is  there  anything  about  the  mine  owner  who  wants  bimetallism  to  raise 
the  value  of  his  bullion?    Not  a  word  about  that. 

What  did  the  platform  say?  Why,  it  pledged  the  Republican  party  to  get 
rid  of  the  gold  standard  and  substitute  bimetallism.  That  is  what  it  did.  The 
Republican  platform  pledges  the  Republican  party  to  substitute  the  double 
standard  for  the  single  gold  standard.  When?  When  other  nations  will  let 
us.  If  the  gold  standard  is  a  good  thing,  then  why  ought  we  to  try  to  get  rid 
of  it?     If  it  is  a  bad  thing,  then  why  should  we  keep  it? 

The  Republican  party  cannot  defend  a  gold  standard  as  a  thing  to  be 
desired.  Why?  Because  when  it  promises  to  get  rid  of  it  and  substitute  some- 
thing else,  it  cannot  very  consistently  say  that  the  thing  it  is  trying  to  get  rid 
of  is  better  than  the  thing  it  is  trying  to  get. 

Now,  why  was  that  platform  written  that  way?  Was  it  because  those  men 
who  wrote  it  are  going  to  try  to  secure  international  bimetallism?  No.  Inter- 
national bimetallism  is  a  fraud,  and  those  know  it  best  who  talk  about  it 
the  most.  The  Republican  platform  declares  in  favor  of  the  maintenance  of  the 
gold  standard  until — that  is  a  long  word,  my  friends — until  what?  Until  the 
American  people  desire  a  change?  No.  They  desire  a  change  now,  because 
the  platform  pledges  the  Republican  party  to  try  to  get  the  change.  How  long? 
Until  the  people  need  a  change?  No.  The  platform  covers  that  ground,  be- 
cause unless  we  need  it,  the  Republican  party  wouldn't  try  to  get  it. 

How  long  are  we  to  maintain  a  gold  standard?  For  a  year?  It  doesn't 
say  that.  For  four  years?  It  doesn't  say  that.  According  to  that  platform, 
although  we  want  to  get  rid  of  a  gold  standard,  although  we  are  anxious  to 
substitute  bimetallism,  we  must  maintain  the  gold  standard  forever,  if  foreign 
nations  insist  on  our  doing  it. 

That  is  what  the  platform  says.  Now,  I  have  not  misquoted  that  platform. 
That  is  the  platform.     If  you  doubt  it,  take  it  and  read  it. 

Now,  they  went  to  Chicago  and  a  part  of  the  Democratic  convention  tried 
to  get  a  plank  just  like  it.  The  minority  plank  in  the  Chicago  platform  declared 
against  free  coinage  because  it  would  interfere  with  the  securing  of  interna- 
tional bimetallism,  toward  which  all  efforts  should  be  directed. 

Now,  is  there  any  difference  between  those  two  platforms?  Both  of  them 
hold  out  international  bimetallism  as  the  desirable  thing,  and  one  of  them 
promises  to  maintain  the  gold  standard  until  we  can  get  it,  and  the  other 
opposes  independent  free  coinage  for  fear  it  will  prevent  us  getting  it — just 
enough  variance  to  show  that  they  were  two  witnesses  with  testimony  furnished 
from  the  same  source.  Read  Greenleaf  on  Evidence  and  you  will  find  that  it 
takes  away  from  the  weight  of  testimony  to  have  two  witnesses  testifying  in 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND.  501 

exactly  the  same  language.     There  must  be  a  little  variance  in  order  to  take 
away  the  appearance  of  having  it  manufactured. 

And  so  these  two  platforms  had  just  enough  of  variance  to  take  away  the 
appearance — and   prove   the   fact — that   they   were    both   written   by   the   same  " 
people. 

Now,  another  thing  about  that  Chicago  convention  that  amused  me  very 
much.  The  people  elected  delegates  to  the  Chicago  convention,  and  they  not 
only  elected  them  but  they  instructed  them,  and  nearly  two-thirds  of  the  dele- 
gates in  that  convention,  whose  seats  were  not  contested,  were  elected  and 
instructed  all  the  way  from  the  primaries  up  to  the  national  convention. 

It  was  known  in  advance  that  a  decided  majority  of  the  delegates  to  that 
convention  were  instructed  for  free  coinage  at  i6  to  i,  without  waiting  for 
the  aid  or  consent  of  any  other  nation.  And  yet,  in  spite  of  that,  in  spite  of 
that  known  desire,  purpose  and  determination  on  the  part  of  the  majority, 
the  Democratic  National  Committee  refused  to  recognize  the  voice  of  the  peo- 
ple and  attempted  to  choose  a  presiding  officer  in  opposition  to  the  wishes  of  a 
majority  of  the  delegates  there. 

I  am  not  speaking  of  the  person  whom  they  selected,  because  he  was  as  free 
from  objection  as  any  one  opposed  to  free  coinage,  but  I  am  speaking  of  the 
fact  that  the  machinery  of  the  party  did  as  it  always  does  when  the  gold  stand- 
ard men  run  it.  It  assumed  to  be  greater  than  the  people  from  whom  the 
machine  derived  its  power. 

Now,  what  was  the  result?  Why,  men  came  down  there  with  the  open  and 
avowed  purpose  of  changing  the  vote  on  the  silver  question  in  spite  of  the 
instructions  which  bound  the  delegates.  Think  of  a  man  calling  himself  a 
Democrat  and  then  boasting  that  he  is  able  to  make  men  violate  the  instruc- 
tions under  which  they  came  and  betray  the  people  who  sent  them  there. 

There  has  been  some  talk  about  the  Monroe  doctrine.  For  years,  for  dec- 
ades, it  has  been  the  policy  of  this  country,  reiterated  by  its  Presidents,  to 
oppose  any  extension  of  the  influence  of  monarchial  institutions  on  the  western 
hemisphere. 

The  time  came  when  the  President  asserted  that  doctrine,  and  what  was 
the  result?  Gold  began  to  slip  away.  And  then  what  did  we.  find  out  in 
Wall  street?  We  found  that  the  financiers  who  insisted  upon  running  this 
country  in  time  of  peace  raised  up  their  hands  and  begged  the  country  not  to 
go  to  war,  not  to  enforce  its  own  policy,  not  to  stand  by  its  own  rights,  not 
to  have  a  dignity  that  would  be  respected,  for  fear  our  gold  would  go  away. 

Do  you  tell  me  that  we  cannot  have  a  financial  policy  of  our  own!  I  tell 
you  that  until  we  do  we  cannot  have  a  foreign  policy  without  the  consent  of 
the  other  nations.  If  we  must  have  a  financial  system  which  we  do  not  want, 
because  otlier  nations  want  us  to  have  it;  if  we  must  do  our  business  upon  gold 
alone,  and  then  put  it  in  the  power  of  opposing  nations  to  rob  us  of  our  gold 
at  any  moment,  I  want  to  ask  you,  my  friends,  whether  we  are  an  independent 
nation  or  whether  we  have  again  become  the  subject  of  a  foreign  power? 

This  question  is  more  than  a  political  question;  it  is  more  than  an  economic 
question.  This  question  is  a  great  moral  question.  It  is  a  question  of  right 
or  wrong,  a  question  of  justice  or  injustice,  and  your  financiers  will  have  to 
study  morality  before  they  can  preach  much  finance  in  this  campaign. 


502  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

Your  poet  Whittier  used  these  words: 

Tell  us  not  of  banks  and  tariffs. 

Cease   your  paltry   peddler   cries; 
Shall  the  good  State  sink  her  honor 

That  your  gambling  stocks  may  rise? 

There   are   persons   among   you    who    estimate   a   nation's    greatness   and 

prosperity  by  the  fluctuations  of  the  stocks  in  which  they  gamble. 

He  said  again: 

Is  the  dollar  only  real, 

God  and  Truth  and  Right  a  dream? 
Weighed   against  your  lying  ledgers. 

Must  our  manhood  kick  the  beam? 
0,  my  God,  for  that  free  spirit 

Which  of  old  in  Boston  town 
Smote  the  Province   House   with  terror. 

Struck  the  crest  of  Andros  down! 
For  another  strong-voiced  Adams 

In  the  city  streets   to  cry, 
"Up  for  God  and  Massachusetts! 

Set  your  feet   on   Mammon's   lie!" 
Perish  banks  and  perish  traffic. 

Spin  your  cotton's   latest   pound, 
But,   in  Heaven's  name,   keep   your   honor. 

Keep   the  heart   of  the   Bay    State   sound. 

My  friends,  this  is  a  question  upon  which  civilization  itself  may  turn.  We 
are  fighting  a  battle  between  the  creators  of  wealth  and  the  money  changers, 
and  we  are  fighting  that  battle  in  the  sight  of  all  the  world.  Never  in  the 
history  of  this  nation  has  a  campaign  attracted  so  much  attention  abroad. 
Why?  Prince  Bismarck  tells  the  story.  He  says  that  the  American  people 
are  freer  by  far  to  legislate  on  this  subject,  and  because  our  opportunity  is 
greater  our  responsibility  is  greater  also.  It  is  true  of  nations  as  it  is  true  of 
individuals — much  will  be  required  of  those  to  whom  much  has  been  given. 

Then  there  are  some  who  said  they  did  not  like  that  plank  which  expressed 
a  preference  for  an  income  tax.  How  tender  some  of  these  consciences  have 
become!  Why,  when  we  were  passing  that  income  tax  bill  there  were  persons 
who  said  it  was  unconstitutional,  and  when  we  pointed  to  the  fact  that  the 
supreme  court  had  already,  declared  time  and  again  that  the  income  tax  was 
constitutional,  these  opponents  of  the  income  tax  still  insisted  that  the  court 
migkt  reverse  itself. 

What  right  had  they  to  attack  the  decisions  of  the  supreme  court?  Why, 
the  attorneys  who  went  before  that  court  and  asked  the  court  to  reverse  its 
decision  showed  the  court,  or  tried  to  show  the  court,  that  those  decisions  were 
wrong.  Out  on  these  anarchists  who  dare  to  go  before  the  court  and  try  to 
overturn  its  decisions! 

And  those  decisions  which  they  tried  to  overturn  were  rendered  by  a  full 
court  and  by  unanimous  opinion.  The  decision  which,  we  think,  may  possibly 
be  reversed  by  a  future  court,  was  rendered  by  a  majority  of  one,  and  that  one 
majority  was  made  by  a  judge  who  changed  his  mind  within  two  months.  My 
friends,  it  has  been  more  than  two  months  since  that  decision  was  rendered, 
and  how  do  we  know  but  that  he  has  got  back  on  our  side  again? 

They  have  a  new  judge  on  the  bench.     Hov/  can  we  tell  until  another  case 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND.  503 

gets  to  him  what  his  opinion  is?  They  are  very  tender  about  a  judgment  they 
like — much  more  so  than  they  are  about  a  decision  that  they  don't  Hke. 

Of  all  these  men  who  are  criticising  there  is  not  one  of  them  who  tells  you 
that  he  lives  under  a  government  which  protects  him  and  yet  that  he  wants  to 
shirk  his  share  of  the  taxes — not  one  of  them! 

Ah,  my  friends,  because  these  men  know  that  an  income  tax  is  just,  they 
know  that  they  are  not  doing  their  duty  when  they  refuse  to  pay  it,  but  they 
skulk  around  in  the  dark  and  call  people  hard  names  rather  than  expose  their 
own  unwillingness  to  support  their  government. 

But  now  I  must  go.  I  want  you  to  take  this  question,  I  want  you  to  study 
it  and  have  your  own  opinion.  They  tell  you  they  want  agitation  stopped.  I 
tell  you  that  agitation  will  never  stop  until  this  gold  standard  is  wiped  out  of 
existence  in  this  country. 

After  the  meeting  I  accompanied  Mr.  Williams  to  his  home  at 
Dedham,  and  closed  the  day  with  a  brief  speech  at  about  midnight 
to  a  hall  full  of  people  who  had  patiently  waited  until  that  hour. 

Early  Saturday  morning  we  took  the  train  for  Manchester,  N.  H., 
passing  through  Lowell  and  Nashua.  The  Manchester  meeting  was 
quite  a  large  one.  Here  I  touched  upon  the  appeal  made  to  savings 
banks  depositors  to  support  the  gold  standard,  and  said: 

Manchester  Speech. 

We  are  told  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  will  be  detrimental  to  those  who 
have  deposits  in  savings  banks.  I  want  you  who  have  money  deposited  in  sav- 
ings banks  to  remember  that  your  deposits  are  secure  only  when  the  banks  can 
collect  the  money  which  they  have  loaned.  If  you  loan  money  on  Western 
lands  and  then  drive  down  the  value  of  Western  lands,  you  are  destroying  the 
securities  which  the  banks  hold  for  what  they  owe  you. 

At  Lawrence,  Mass.,  also  a  large  number  were  gathered.  Here 
the  citizens  had  prepared  a  dinner  for  our  party.  A  brief  stop  was  made 
at  Portland,  Me.,  where  a  large  meeting  was  held  near  the  depot,  and 
where  we  met  the  Bath  reception  committee.  Upon  arrival  at  the 
latter  place  we  were  escorted  to  Mr.  Sewall's  residence  by  a  torch-light 
procession.  Later  in  the  evening  I  delivered  an  address  to  an  im- 
mense audience,  one  of  the  largest,  it  was  said,  ever  assembled  in 
Maine.  Mr.  Sewall  presided  on  this  occasion  and  introduced  me.  A 
part  of  the  address  is  reproduced : 

Bath  Speech. 
This  visit  to  the  home  of  my  colleague  in  this  typical  city  of  Maine  is 
one  of  the  most  pleasant  incidents  of  my  journey  from  the  Platte  to  the  Ken- 
nebec. I  did  not  become  acquainted  with  Mr.  Sewall  until  the  Chicago  con- 
vention met,  but  my  opinion  of  him  has  improved  with  each  passing  day,  and 
I   am   glad  to  have  the  privilege  of  spending  a  brief  period  with  him   and 


504  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

among  his  neighbors.  I  can  assure  you  that  we  have  no  hostile  designs 
against  the  people  of  the  east.  The  policies  which  we  advocate  will,  we  believe, 
help  the  people  of  every  section  of  the  country;  therefore,  I  always  enjoy 
defending  these  policies  before  such  as  have  hitherto  opposed  them.  Such 
is  the  all-pervading  power  of  truth  that  I  expect  some  time  to  see  bimetallism 
at  i6  to  I  as  popular  in  Maine  as  it  is  now  in  Colorado. 

We  are  not  in  favor  of  free  coinage  because  we  desire  to  help  the  mine 
owner,  nor  because  silver  is  produced  in  the  United  States.  We  would  be  as 
heartily  in  favor  of  free  silver  if  the  United  States  did  not  produce  an  ounce 
of  that  metal.  We  are  for  the  coinage  of  gold  as  well  as  for  the  coinage  of 
silver;  we  simply  hold  that  gold  should  not  demand  a  monopoly  of  mint  priv- 
ileges. If  silver  were  now  given  free  coinage  and  gold  were  excluded  from  the 
mint,  we  would  be  advocating  the  free  coinage  of  gold. 

The  science  of  money  is  not  difficult  to  understand.  Our  opponents  say 
that  honest  money  is  sound  money,  and  that  sound  money  is  honest  money, 
and  they  seldom  get  outside  of  that  circle.  Their  only  definition  of  sound 
or  honest  money  is:  Money  which  is  worth  as  much  in  the  form  of  bullion 
as  in  the  form  of  coin.  I  want  to  show  you  how  absurd  that  definition  is. 
If  the  definition  is  a  good  one,  then  the  Mexican  dollar  is  an 
honest  dollar,  because  the  Mexican  dollar  is  worth  just  the  same  in 
the  form  of  bullion  that  it  is  in  the  form  of  coin.  The  trouble 
with  the  definition  is  that  it  leaves  out  of  consideration  the  most 
important  thing  in  a  dollar,  namely,  its  purchasing  power.  The  gold 
standard  definition  of  sound  or  honest  money  makes  no  mention  of  purchasing 
power.  Let  me  show  you  what  is  possible  under  that  definition.  Let  us  sup- 
pose that  all  the  nations  of  the  world  should  agree  upon  the  gold  standard 
and  make  our  dollar  the  unit.  Then  let  us  suppose  that  the  next  day  these 
nations  should  agree  to  destroy  ninety-nine  one-hundredths  of  all  the  gold 
dollars  in  existence,  what  would  be  the  result?  The  dollar,  according  to  the 
gold  standard  definition,  would  still  be  an  honest  dollar,  because  if  melted  it 
would  not  lose  any  of  its  value,  and  yet  the  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar 
would  be  largely  increased.  In  fact,  if  a  person  owed  a  debt,  he  would  have 
to  sell  about  one  hundred  .times  as  much  of  his  property  to  secure  the  money 
to  pay  his  debt;  and  yet  he  would  have  the  consolation  of  knowing  that  he 
was  paying  his  debts  in  honest  dollars,  according  to  the  gold  standard  idea. 
But  let  us  take  another  supposition.  Let  us  suppose  that  after  all  the  nations 
had  agreed  upon  a  gold  standard  new  gold  mines  should  be  discovered. 
Suppose  the  production  of  gold  increased  until  the  world  had  one  hundred 
times  as  many  gold  dollars  as  it  had  before;  what  would  be  the  result?  Accord- 
ing to  the  gold  standard  definition  the  dollar  would  still  be  an  honest  dollar, 
because  if  melted  it  would  not  lose  anything;  but  the  purchasing  power  of 
the  dollar  would  fall,  because  of  the  increased  number  of  dollars.  Would  the 
money  loaner  believe  that  he  was  being  paid  in  honest  dollars  if  the  dollars 
would  only  buy  a  hundredth  part  of  what  they  would  before?  And  yet  the 
gold  standard  definition  would  apply,  no  matter  how  much  the  quantity  of 
money  might  be  increased  or  decreased.  This  illustrates  the  absurdity  of  a 
definition  of  honest  money  which  fails  to  consider  the  purchasing  power  of  a 
dollar.    An  honest  dollar  would  be  a  dollar  whose  average  purchasing  power 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND.  505 

would  remain  the  same  from  year  to  year,  and  this  can  only  be  secured  by 
having  the  quantity  of  money  keep  pace  with  the  demand  for  money.  Not  only 
do  the  advocates  of  the  gold  standard  omit  all  reference  to  purchasing  power 
in  defining  an  honest  dollar,  but  they  do  not  seem  to  understand  that  the  law 
gives  to  gold  money  the  one  characteristic  which  they  praise. 

Why  does  the  gold  lose  nothing  by  melting?  Simply  because  the  law 
provides  for  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  bullion  into  gold  dollars. 
If  we  had  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  as  we  have  of  gold,  there 
would  be  no  difference  between  the  coinage  value  and  the  bullion  value  of 
silver.  You  have  doubtless  heard  the  gold  standard  advocates  talk  of  the 
melting-pot  test.  A  debate  once  occurred  in  our  State  something  like  this: 
The  gold  bug,  in  order  to  prove  the  superiority  of  gold,  said:  "If  a  man  has 
in  his  house  $i,ooo  in  paper,  $i,ooo  in  silver,  and  $i,ooo  in  gold,  and  his  house 
burns  down,  the  paper  will  be  destroyed,  the  silver  will  be  melted  and  worth 
one-half,  and  the  gold,  although  melted,  will  be  worth  as  much  as  it  was 
before.  Therefore  gold  is  the  only  good  money."  His  opponent  replied: 
"That  is  true  if  a  man  puts  his  money  in  his  house  and  the  house  burns  down; 
but  suppose  he  puts  his  money  in  a  boat  and  the  boat  turns  over?  Then 
the  gold  and  silver  will  go  to  the  bottom  and  be  lost,  while  the  paper  will 
float.  Therefore  paper  is  the  only  good  money."  One  argument  is  just  as 
good  as  the  other,  but  both  speakers  erred  in  trying  to  prove  the  value  of 
money  by  an  unusual  and  extraordinary  use  of  money. 

(A  voice — "If  I  buy  silver  at  the  present  price,  65  cents  an  ounce,  into  how 
much  money  can  I  have  it  coined?")  Under  the  present  law  you  cannot  have 
it  coined  at  all.  Under  free  coinage  you  can  have  it  coined,  but  then  you 
cannot  buy  it  for  65  cents  an  ounce.  Just  remember  that  under  free  coinage 
no  man  will  sell  his  silver  for  less  than  a  dollar,  because  he  can  get  it  coined 
at  any  time  into  a  dollar. 

The  above  question  has  often  been  asked,  and  the  fallacy  lies  in 
the  fact  that  the  questioner  supposes  the  purchase  of  the  silver  to  be 
made  under  monometallism,  and  then  supposes  it  to  be  coined  under 
bimetallism,  ignoring  entirely  the  change  which  takes  place  upon  the 
passage  of  the  free  coinage  law. 

In  order  to  illustrate  the  absurdity  of  the  argument  that  under  free 
coinage  a  person  could  buy  silver  at  50  cents  and  have  it  coined  into 
a  dollar,  I  have  often  told  a  story  which  I  found  in  a  book  written  by 
Hon.  Ignatius  Donnelly.  Two  men  were  discussing  the  silver  ques- 
tion in  a  car,  when  some  one  asked  the  silver  advocate,  "Do  you  think 
it  is  right  to  pass  a  law  which  will  enable  a  man  to  buy  my  silver  at 
50  cents  and  coin  it  into  100  cents  and  make  the  difference?"  The 
silver  advocate  replied,  "Under  free  coinage  any  person  owning  412^ 
grains  of  standard  silver  can  have  it  coined  into  one  dollar  without 
charge  for  mintage.  That  being  the  case,  is  there  any  one  in  this  car 
who,  under  free  coinage,  would  sell  that  much  silver  for  less  than  100 

29 


506  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

cents  and  let  the  purchaser  make  the  profit?"  There  was  silence  for 
a  moment,  and  then  some  one  answered,  *'I  would."  The  reply  came 
from  a  young  man  who  was  sitting  by  his  mother,  and  she  protected 
him  from  further  inquiry  by  saying,  "Never  mind  him;  he  is  an  idiot.  I 
am  just  taking  him  to  the  asylum." 

Sunday  was  spent  upon  the  shores  of  the  Kennebec.  Church 
occupied  our  attention  in  the  forenoon,  and  in  the  afternoon  Mr, 
Sewall  took  me  to  Small  Point,  fourteen  miles  away,  the  favorite 
ocean  resort  of  the  people  of  that  village.  The  visit  to  Maine  was  en- 
joyed by  the  entire  party,  and  I  found  the  correspondents,  like  myself, 
sorry  when  the  time  for  departure  arrived.  While  in  the. State  I  met 
ex-Governor  Plaisted,  and  his  son  Fred  W.,  who  was  the  Maine  mem- 
ber of  the  Notification  Committee. 

Leaving  Bath  about  midnight  we  arrived  at  Lynn,  Mass.,  in 
time  for  breakfast.  At  this  place  we  met  a  number  of  ver>-  ardent 
supporters  of  bimetallism,  one  of  whom  since  the  dection  has  been 
made  mayor  by  a  plurality  of  nearly  2,000,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that 
the  city  gave  the  Republican  electors  something  like  3,000  plurality. 

Passing  through  Boston,  our  next  stop  was  at  Providence,  where, 
m  a  brief  speech,  I  quoted  the  definition  of  "honest  money"  given 
by  Prof.  Andrews,  of  Brown  University,  in  his  recent  work  upon 
that  subject,  and  assured  the  audience  that  the  silver  advocates  of 
the  West  were  in  entire  accord  with  their  distinguished  townsman. 
With  an  hour's  stay  at  New  London,  and  a  few  other  stops  still 
more  brief,  we  bade  adieu  to  New  England,  and  re-entered  New 
Jersey. 


CHAPTER  XXXVIII. 


TAMMANY  HALL  AND  VICINITY. 

THE  latter  part  of  Tuesday  was  spent  in  New  Jersey.  Early 
in  the  evening  an  outdoor  meeting  was  held  at  Paterson, 
the  home  of  the  Republican  candidate  for  the  Vice-Presi- 
dency. The  interest  was  so  intense  here  that  I  was  led  to  expect  a 
stronger  support  than  the  election  showed. 

During  the  meeting  the  electric  light  went  out,  and  we  were  left 
in  the  dark  for  a  few  minutes. 

I  quote  below  an  extract  from  the  Paterson  speech: 

Paterson  Speech. 

Money  is  a  creature  of  law,  and  if  the  laws  do  not  create  enough  money, 
then  there  will  not  be  enough  in  circulation.  If  you  want  more  wheat,  you  can 
go  out  and  raise  wheat;  if  you  want  more  of  any  kind  of  manufactured  goods, 
you  can  produce  them;  but  if  the  people  want  more  money,  they  cannot  bring 
money  into  existence.  If  a  man  attempts  to  add  one  dollar  to  the  volume  of  the 
nation's  currency,  he  is  called  a  "counterfeiter"  and  imprisoned  in  the  peniten- 
tiary. 

Our  opponents  seem  to  act  upon  the  theory  that  by  making  the  total  volume 
of  currency  less  they  can  increase  the  amount  which  each  individual  has  of  it. 
This  is  a  new  principle,  unknown  to  the  arithmetic  we  studied  when  we  were 
young. 

The  last  meeting  of  the  day  was  held  at  Newark,  in  a  very  large 
hall  at  Caledonia  Park.  Mr.  J.  Randolph  Woodruff,  of  the  Essex 
County  Committee,  introduced  Hon.  Joseph  A.  Beecher  as  tem- 
porary chairman,  and  Mayor  James  N.  Seymour  as  permanent  chair- 
man. 

An  extract  from  the  speech  made  at  this  place  will  be  found  below : 

Newark  Speech. 
We  are  in  the  midst  of  a  campaign  which  will  be  memorable  in  history. 
No  matter  on  which  side  of  the  money  question  you  may  stand,  you  must  admit 
that  much  depends  upon  its  settlement.  Deep  feeling  is  aroused  on  both  sides. 
We  are  combating  a  system  of  finance  which  is  entrenched  behind  strong 
bulwarks  and  able  to  call  to  its  support  all  those  influences  which  have  been 
in  the  habit  of  dominating  politics.  We  realize  what  it  will  mean  to  lose  this 
campaign  and  to  declare— this  nation  has  never  so  declared  before— the  in- 
ability of  this  nation  to  conduct  its  own  business. 

507 


508  TAMMANY  HALL  AND  VICINITY. 

Year  after  year  the  two  great  parties  have  declared  for  bimetallism.  This 
year,  for  the  first  time,  one  party  has  thrown  its  influence  on  the  side  of  gold 
as  the  only  standard  money.  We  have  hitherto  sent  representatives  abroad 
to  try  to  secure  international  bimetallism,  but  have  always  reserved  for  our- 
selves the  right  to  act  alone.  I  beg  you  to  weigh  well  your  action  before 
you  cast  your  vote  on  the  side  of  gold.  If  you  have  been  Republicans  when 
that  party  was  declaring  in  favor  of  bimetallism,  it  is  not  your  duty  to  stay 
with  that  party  when  it  deserts  bimetallism.  If  there  was  a  reason  sufficient 
to  lead  you  into  the  Republican  party  when  that  party  endorsed  bimetallism, 
there  is  sufficient  reason  now  to  lead  you  out  of  that  party.  We,  as  a 
people,  have  our  own  welfare  to  consult;  no  nation  stands  in  the  same  atti- 
tude that  we  do. 

The  Republicans  tell  us  that  we  ought  to  have  the  gold  standard  because 
England  has  it.  I  reply  that  we  cannot  have  the  gold  standard  because  so 
many  nations  have  already  adopted  it  that  they  have  forced  up  the  price  of 
gold,  and  for  us  to  join  them  is  to  commit  murder  upon  others  while  we 
commit  suicide  upon  ourselves. 

The  bimetallic  system  is  defended  by  arguments  which  cannot  be  answered. 
You  never  find  one  who  turns  from  bimetallism  to  gold  except  when  he  does 
so  from  fear.  Such  conversion  is  not  conversion  at  all.  You  cannot  convert  a 
man  by  terrorizing  over  him  with  a  rod.  If  you  will  go  among  your  ac- 
quaintances you  will  not  find  any  man  who  has  thought  his  way  from  bi- 
metallism over  to  the  gold  standard.  You  may  find  a  few  Democrats  who 
now  talk  for  gold,  but  if  you  do  you  will  find  them  tied  to  some  special 
interest. 

Truth  alone  is  invincible.  I  am  called  a  dangerous  man;  but  it  is  simply 
because  any  man  is  dangerous  who  plants  himself  upon  a  truth  and  tries 
to  defend  that  truth.  Whether  I  live  or  die  is  a  matter  of  little  consequence, 
but  the  truth  will  never  die;  it  will  go  marching  on  forever. 

I  believe  that  bimetallism  will  succeed  because  it  is  right;  I  have  another 
reason  for  believing  that  it  will  succeed.  The  gold  standard  makes  the  rich 
richer  and  the  poor  poorer;  it  decreases  the  number  of  those  who  are  happy, 
and  increases  the  number  of  those  who  are  in  distress,  and  the  poor  and  the 
distressed  are  on  our  side.  If  we  have  not  a  majority  now,  it  is  only  a 
question  of  time  when  we  will  have,  if  the  gold  standard  continues.  When 
you  can  prove  to  me  that  the  Creator  intended  civilization  to  lapse  again 
into  the  dark  ages;  when  you  can  prove  to  me  that  the  few  should  ride 
upon  the  backs  of  those  who  toil,  then,  and  not  until  then,  can  you  con- 
vince me  that  the  gold  standard  will  prevail.  When  you  can  prove  to  me 
that  the  syndicates  should  be  permitted  to  run  the  country;  that  trusts 
should  be  permitted  to  ruin  business  men  and  then  prey  upon  society,  then, 
and  not  until  then,  will  I  admit  that  the  gold  standard  will  prevail. 

What  hope  does  the  Republican  platform  hold  out  to  the  people?  Only  the 
hope  that  foreign  nations  will  be  more  kind  to  the  American  people  than  the 
Republican  convention  was. 

The  night  was  spent  in  New  York  City,  at  the  Bartholdi. 
During  Tuesday  forenoon  I  was  in  consuhation  with  Mr.  Sewall 


TAMMANY  HALL  AND  VICINITY.  509 

and  the  officers  of  the  National  Committee,  while  a  speech  at  Jersey 
City  occupied  the  afternoon — perhaps  I  should  say  two  speeches, 
since  I  addressed  both  a  meeting  indoors  and  an  overflow  meeting 
on  the  outside.  I  had  intended  to  spend  the  day  in  rest,  but  the 
entreaties  of  ex-Sheriff  Robert  Davis  were  too  earnest  to  be  with- 
stood; hence  the  Jersey  City  meetings. 

The  Tammany  Hall  demonstration  of  that  evening  was  one  of 
the  important  events  of  the  campaign.  The  wigwam  was  densely 
packed  from  the  rear  of  the  stage  to  the  top  of  the  gallery.  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Russell,  of  England,  with  his  wife  and  a  party  of 
friends,  entered  the  hall,  but  they  were  unable  to  reach  the  seats 
assigned  them,  and  finally  withdrew  before  the  meeting  opened. 

John  W.  Keller,  Esq.,  was  chairman  of  the  meeting.  John  R. 
McGoldrick,  Esq.,  read  resolutions  endorsing  the  National  and  State 
tickets,  and  they  were  adopted  unanimously. 

I  may  add  here  that  Tammany  Hall  is  entitled  to  great  credit 
for  the  gallant  fight  made  in  behalf  of  the  principles  set  forth  in  the 
national  platform.  The  work  of  this  society  stands  out  the  more 
conspicuously  when  it  is  remembered  that  New  York  City  is  not  only 
the  money  center  of  the  nation,  but  the  seat  of  those  financial  forces 
which  have  for  so  many  years  dominated  the  affairs  of  the  United 
States.  Notwithstanding  the  enormous  disadvantage  under  which  the 
advocates  of  free  silver  labored  in  New  York  City,  the  Republicans  only 
carried  the  city  by  a  small  majority,  considering  the  large  number  of 
votes  cast.  Without  meaning  to  discriminate  against  any  one  not 
mentioned,  I  might  suggest  that  Hon.  John  C.  Sheehan,  Congressman 
Amos  J.  Cummings,  Hon.  Henry  D.  Purroy,  and  Hon.  Thomas  F. 
Grady  were  especially  active  in  their  efforts  to  secure  the  indorsement 
of  the  national  ticket  and  platform  by  the  Tammany  Society.  The 
following  is  an  extract  from  the  Tammany  Hall  speech: 

Tammany  Hall  Speech. 

I  acknowledge  my  gratitude  to  the  Tammany  Society  for  the  privilege 
which  it  has  afforded  me  of  speaking  to  the  people  here  assembled.  I  appreciate 
the  value  of  an  organization  like  this,  trained  and  compact,  ready  to  do  effective 
service  at  a  moment's  notice,  and  I  am  glad  to  carry  back  to  the  West— although 
it  is  not  news  to  any  one  who  reads  the  papers  or  knows  the  history  of  the 
organization — that  the  Tammany  Society  is  in  earnest  in  its  efforts  to  give  ef- 
fective support,  not  only  to  the  Chicago  ticket,  but  to  the  Chicago  platform 
upon  which  the  ticket  stands.  The  Tammany  Society  is  required,  by  its  con- 
stitution, to  celebrate  each  recurring  Fourth  of  July,  and  upon  that  day  it  is  di- 
rected by  its  organic  laws  to  have  read  in  the  presence  of  those  assembled 


510  TAMMANY  HALL  AND  VICINITY. 

the  Declaration  of  Independence.  It  was  once  my  privilege  (in  1892)  to  take 
part  in  one  of  those  celebrations,  and  I  am  not  surprised  to  learn  that  the 
organization  which  every  year  celebrates  the  adoption  of  the  declaration  of 
our  political  independence  gives  enthusiastic  support  to  the  platform  which 
declares  for  financial  independence. 

We  are  engaged  in  a  great  contest,  which  is  to  determine  whether  a  few 
men  banded  together  are  more  powerful  than  all  the  rest  of  the  people. 

While  I  do  not  want  to  array  one  class  against  another,  I  am  willing  to 
array  all  the  people  who -suffer  from  the  operation  of  trusts  against  the  few 
people  who  operate  the  trusts.' 

If  our  opponents  are  afraid  to  discuss  the  money  question  and  risk  a  verdict 
on  that  alone,  we  are  willing  to  meet  them  on  broader  grounds,  and  let  the 
public  decide  whether  the  administration  of  the  Government  can  be  more 
safely  entrusted  to  those  who  oppose  the  Chicago  platform  than  to  those 
who  stand  upon  it — whether  the  Government  is  safer  in  the  hands  of  syndicates, 
stock  exchanges  and  representatives  of  the  trusts  than  in  the  hands  of  those 
who  are  opposed  to  these  elements. 

I  understand  that  a  distinguished  citizen  of  this  State,  Hon.  Chauncey  M. 
Depew,  thinks  that  my  election  would  be  dangerous  to  the  country.  There 
is  one  advantage  in  having  Mr.  Depew  against  me,  and  that  is,  that  if  I  am 
elected  he  will  not  come  to  Washington,  tell  me  that  he  helped  elect  me,  and 
urge  me  to  use  my  influence  against  the  arbitration  of  difTerences  between  rail- 
roads and  their  employes.  There  is  another  advantage  which  I  shall  derive  from 
his  opposition.  If  I  am  elected  he  will  not  be  in  a  position  to  ask  me  to  use 
executive  influence  against  the  Senate  bill  to  protect  the  people  from  govern- 
ment by  injunction. 

There  is  one  great  consolation  that  I  find  in  the  opposition  of  many  who 
have  arrayed  themselves  against  me,  and  that  is  that,  not  having  their  aid  in 
the  campaign,  I  shall  not  be  under  their  domination  after  the  campaign  is  over. 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  position  taken  by  the  Republican  party  ought  to 
awaken  the  people  to  the  dangers  before  them.  We  find  that  a  few  financiers 
are  able  to  control  the  amount  of  gold,  and  by  sending  it  out  of  the  country 
are  able  to  run  stocks  down  and  reap  a  rich  profit,  and  then,  by  bringing  it 
back  again,  are  able  to  raise  stocks  and  make  another  rich  profit.  We  find 
that  our  financial  system  has  been  turned  over  to  the  stock  gambler.  As 
long  as  our  Government  receives  its  financial  inspiration  from  railroad  wreck- 
ers and  stock  jobbers  legislation  will  be  such  as  to  make  it  more  profitable 
to  be  a  non-producer  than  to  be  a  producer.  In  time  of  peace  you  cannot 
trust  the  financial  wisdom  of  those  who  manipulate  your  stock  markets,  nor 
can  you  trust  their  patriotism  in  time  of  war. 

Mr.  Sewall  was  introduced  to  the  audience,  and  then  we  together 
visited  several  outdoor  meetings.  The  rain  poured  down  all  the 
evening  and  made  it  impossible  for  us  to  go  to  all  of  the  stands  which 
had  been  erected. 


TAMMANY  HALL  AND  VICINITY.  511 

Before  going  to  the  hotel,  we  stopped  at  the  headquarters  of 
Bryan  &  Sewall  Club  No.  i,  which,  under  the  leadership  of  Con- 
gressman William  Sulzer,  became  a  powerful  influence  in  the  cam- 
paign. Mr.  Sulzer  was  one  of  the  first  New  York-  Democrats  to  take 
up  the  fight  for  the  endorsement  of  the  platform,  and  his  labors  con- 
tinued until  the  votes  were  counted. 


CHAPTER  XXXIX. 


TRAVELING  WESTWARD. 

THE  Tammany  meetings  over,  we  took  the  midnight  express  for 
the  West,  arriving  at  Washington,  D.  C,  early  in  the  morn- 
ing. Here  I  took  leave  of  a  very  agreeable  traveling  compan- 
ion, National  Committeeman  Josephus  Daniels,  of  North  Carolina,  who 
had  accompanied  me  from  Raleigh  through  New  England,  and  who, 
by  relieving  me  from  the  details  of  the  journey,  enabled  me  to 
economize  my  strength.  Mr.  B.  G.  Davis,  who  was  my  secretary 
during  a  part  of  the  Fifty-Third  Congress,  joined  me  here  and 
cared  for  the  letters  which  awaited  my  arrival  at  each  stopping  place, 
while  Congressman  Benton  McMillan,  of  Tennessee,  was  prepared  to 
take  my  place  upon  the  platform  in  case  weariness  should  overcome 
me.  The  West  Virginia  reception  committee,  headed  by  National 
Committeeman  John  T.  McGraw,  of  Grafton,  was  composed  of  several 
prominent  Democrats  and  Populists  of  the  State,  among  the  latter, 
Col.  Nat  Ward  Fitzgerald. 

The  first  stop  was  made  at  historic  Harper's  Ferry,  and  during  the 
day  meetings  were  held  at  Martinsburg,  Keyser,  and  Grafton,  in  West 
Virginia,  and  at  Cumberland,  in  Maryland.  At  Martinsburg,  Senator 
Faulkner  presided;  at  Keyser,  ex-Senator  Davis  was  chairman  of  the 
meeting. 

Senator  Davis  being  one  of  the  wealthiest  men  in  the  State,  his 
presence  on  this  occasion  was  a  forcible  reply  to  the  charge  that  our 
platform  was  a  menace  to  possessors  of  property. 

We  were  late  in  reaching  Grafton,  and  it  was  nearly  midnight  when 
the  third  meeting  at  that  place  adjourned. 

Thursday  began  with  a  speech  at  the  Fair  Grounds  at  Clarksburg. 
The  following  is  an  extract: 

Clarksburg  Speech. 
I  desire  to  quote  to  you,  not  from  Democratic  authority  but  from  Re- 
publican authority.  I  shall  quote  to  you,  not  from  the  lesser  Republicans  but 
from  the  greatest  Republican;  not  from  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party  but  from 
the  leader,  the  Republican  candidate  for  the  Presidency.  I  desire  to  quote  what 
he  said  this  year  and  by  the  side  of  it  I  desire  to  place  what  he  said  six  years 
ago  in  regard. to  the  necessity  of  increasing  the  circulation.  You  will  find  in 
his  letter  of  acceptance  this  year  the  following  words: 

512 


TRAVELING  WESTWARD.  513 

It  Is  not  more  money  that  we  want.  What  we  want  is  to  put  the  money  we  already 
have  at   work. 

Now  remember,  my  friends,  that  these  words  were  uttered  at  a  time  when 
the  money  in  actual  circulation  had  fallen  off  $150,000,000  within  two  years. 
Remember  that  he  says  that  we  do  not  want  more  money  but  simply  need 
to  put  what  we  have  in  circulation.  Let  me  compare  that  statement  with 
his  utterance  of  six  years  ago,  when,  instead  of  having  a  decreasing  volume  of 
currency,  we  had  an  increase  of  about  $24,000,000  a  year.  At  that  time  the 
Republicans  were  trying  to  substitute  the  Sherman  law  for  the  Bland-Allison 
act.  The  Bland-Allison  act  put  into  circulation  about  $24,000,000  per  year,  so 
that  the  circulation,  instead  of  decreasing  as  it  is  now,  was  increasing.  Mr. 
McKinley  was  then  a  member  of  Congress,  and  speaking  in  support  of  the 
Sherman  bill,  he  said: 

I  will  not  vote  against  this  bill  and  thus  deprive  the  people  of  my  country  and  the 
laborers  and  the  producers  and  the  industries  of  my  country  of  $30,000,000  annually  of 
additional  circulating  medium. 

At  that  time  he  declared  that  he  would  not  vote  to  withhold  from  the 
people,  the  laborers,  the  producers  and  the  industries  of  the  country,  the 
advantages  of  an  increasing  circulation.  And  yet  now,  when  the  circulation 
is  actually  decreasing,  he  tells  you  that  it  is  not  more  money  that  we  need,  but 
that  we  simply  need  to  put  the  money  we  have  in  circulation.  What  change 
has  taken  place  in  the  last  six  years?  Then  he  desired  to  increase  the  amount 
of  money  in  circulation;  now  he  believes  that  all  we  have  to  do  is  to  have  confi- 
dence. The  Republican  platform  upon  which  the  candidate  stands  declares  in 
favor  of  the  maintenance  of  the  gold  standard  until  the  leading  commercial 
nations  of  the  world  join  us  in  abandoning  it.  Let  me  read  you  what  the  Re- 
publican candidate  said  on  this  subject  six  years  ago: 

I  am  for  the  largest  use  of  silver  in  the  currency  of  the  country.  I  would  not  dishonor 
it.  I  would  give  it  equal  credit  with  gold.  I  would  make  no  discrimination.  I  would 
utilize  both  metals  as  money  and  discredit  neither.    I  want  the  double  standard. 

He  wanted  the  double  standard  then;  he  wants  the  gold  standard  now. 
What  change  has  taken  place?  If  the  double  standard  was  good  six  years 
ago,  it  is  good  now.  The  principles  which  underlie  the  double  standard  have 
not  changed  in  six  years;  the  laws  of  finance  have  not  changed  in  six  years; 
the  needs  of  this  country  have  not  changed  in  six  years.  The  rules  which 
governed  then  govern  now,  and  yet  we  find  some  Republicans  who  were 
openly,  earnestly,  enthusiastically  championing  the  double  standard  then  but 
who,  for  reasons  known  or  unknown,  have  turned  completely  about  and  are 
opposing  today  what  they  advocated  then. 

One  of  the  arguments  now  made  against  our  position  is  that  we  are  trying 
to  furnish  a  market  for  silver  bullion.  Our  opponents  say  that  our  cause  is 
simply  the  cause  of  the  bullion  owner.  We  deny  it;  we  insist  that  we  want 
silver  for  money  and  that  we  want  it,  not  because  we  produce  silver  in  this 
country,  but  because  we  need  silver  for  money  to  carry  on  the  commerce  of 
this  country.  And  yet  the  very  people  who  now  accuse  us  of  working  in  the 
interests  of  the  mine  owners  are  supporting  the  Republican  candidate  for  the 
Presidency  who    six  years  ago  advocated  the  Sherman  law  and  gave  as  one 


514  TRAVELING  WESTWARD. 

of  his  reasons  that  it  would  furnish  a  market  for  all  the  silver  produced  in  the 
United  States.     Let  me  read  you  what  he  said: 

So  I  say,  Mr.  Speaker,  this  bill  Is  just  to  the  silver  producers  of  the  United  States,  for 
it  does  what  the  present  law,  as  administered  by  every  administration  for  ten  years,  has 
not  done.  It  takes  every  dollar  of  silver  bullion  produced  in  the  United  States  and  places 
It  at  the  disposal  of  the  people  as  money. 

And  yet  the  man  who  used  that  language  six  years  ago  is  standing  upon 
a  platform  which  refuses  to  take  a  single  ounce  of  silver  produced  in  this 
country  and  put  it  at  the  disposal  of  the  people  as  money. 

I  call  your  attention  to  these  extracts  from  the  speech  made  by  Mr. 
McKinley  in  Congress  and  compare  his  utterances  then  with  his  utterances 
now,  not  because  I  deny  to  a  man  the  right  to  change  his  mind,  but  because 
I  insist  that  when  a  man  changes  his  mind  he  ought  to  have  reasons  for  the 
change  which  he  is  willing  to  give  to  the  American  people.  (A  voice:  "Give 
it  to  Grover.")  No,  my  friends,  I  am  not  going  to  say  one  word  against  the 
President.  I  am  going  to  leave  history  to  record  that  the  man  who  went  into 
the  Presidency  with  an  overwhelming  majority  went  out  of  office  supporting 
a  ticket  which  did  not  carry  a  single  county  in  the  United  States.  The  ticket 
which  has  the  support  of  the  administration  will  not  even  have  the  credit 
of  having  died  an  honorable  death,  because  it  was  put  into  the  field  by  those 
who  did  not  intend  to  vote  for  it  and  was  only  placed  before  the  people  for 
the  purpose  of  deceiving  them  and  to  furnish  a  ticket  for  those  few  Democrats 
who  object  to  the  Chicago  platform  and  are  not  yet  quite  ready  to  enter  the 
Republican  party. 

Here  I  received  a  gavel  from  the  wood  of  the  house  in  which  Stone- 
wall Jackson  was  born.  An  old  colleague,  ex-Congressman  Alderson, 
presided. 

After  speaking  briefly  at  Parkersburg,  Marshall  and  Sistersville,  we 
concluded  the  day  at  Wheeling,  where  the  largest  meeting  in  the  State- 
was  held.  The  city  was  decorated  and  enthusiasm  ran  high.  Below 
will  be  found  a  portion  of  the  speech  delivered  here: 

Wheeling  Speech. 
Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  We  are  engaged  in  a  campaign 
upon  which  much  depends.  I  have  heard  since  I  came  into  the  State  that  a 
prominent  member  of  a  corporation  has  boasted  that  the  Republicans  have 
$300,000  to  spend  in  this  State  to  prevent  the  electoral  vote  being  cast  for  the 
Chicago  ticket.  In  times  of  quiet,  when  people  feel  no  deep  interest  in  the 
result,  money  may  possibly  be  expended  in  such  a  way  as  to  affect  an  election, 
but  in  times  like  these,  when  the  people  are  in  earnest,  money  cannot  change 
the  result.  If  our  opponents  are  allowed  to  intimidate  and  corrupt  the  voters, 
then  the  people  are  helpless  to  secure  any  remedy  through  legislation  because 
every  time  intimidation  is  successful  it  encourages  those  who  try  it  to  try 
intimidation  again.  Every  time  corruption  is  successful  it  encourages  corrup- 
tionists  to  try  corruption  again,  and  when  they  win  by  corruption  and  intimi- 
dation they  then  enact  legislation  which  secures  to  them  out  of  the  pockets 
of  the  geople,  vastly  more  than  they  expend  in  carrying  the  election. 


TRAVELING  WESTWARD.  515 

I  rejoice  that  such  a  demonstration  as  this  is  possible  in  the  State  of 
West  Virginia.  Without  any  money  being  spent  by  the  committee,  great 
interest  has  been  aroused.  The  fact  that  you  are  wilUng  to  give  your  time  and 
to  contribute,  even  at  a  sacrifice,  whatever  is  necessary  to  prepare  this  mag- 
nificent demonstration,  is  evidence  that  you  are  in  earnest  and  that  you  mean 
business  in  this  campaign. 

We  have  declared  the  money  question  to  be  the  paramount  issue  of  the 
campaign.  Ordinary  questions  may  be  settled  at  any  time,  but  we  have  reached 
a  crisis  in  our  financial  affairs  when  it  is  necessary  for  the  United  States  to 
take  a  decided  stand,  and  what  that  stand  shall  be  must  be  determined,  not  by 
a  few  financiers,  but  by  the  American  people.  Some  of  our  opponents  seem 
to  think  that  only  a  few  people  are  able  to  understand  the  money  question. 
They  even  go  so  far  as  to  assert  that  financial  questions  are  too  complicated 
to  be  understood  by  the  ordinary  citizen.  When  I  find  a  man  who  thinks  that 
the  money  question  is  too  complicated  for  the  people,  I  generally  find  a  man 
who  thinks  it  is  just  about  complicated  enough  for  himself.  When  I  find  a  man 
who  thinks  that  the  money  question  is  too  deep  for  the  people,  I  generally  find  a 
man  who  thinks  that  he  has  made  a  study  of  deep  questions.  Whenever  I 
find  a  man  who  thinks  that  the  masses  are  not  intelligent  enough  to  act  for 
themselves,  I  generally  find  a  man  who  wants  to  act  for  them.  And  you  may 
rest  assured  that  if  you  let  some  one  act  for  all  the  people  on  the  theory  that 
all  the  people  have  not  sense  enough  to  act  for  themselves,  then  you  may 
depend  upon  it  that  the  one  who  does  the  acting  will  not  neglect  himself.  The 
money  question  is  not  a  complicated  question;  it  requires  no  extended  study  to 
understand  the  principle  which  underlies  it.  It  is  so  simple  that  there  is  no 
person  in  this  audience  who  need  go  away  without  a  clear  understanding  of  the 
subject.  You  can  make  money  either  dear  or  cheap  by  law.  You  can  make 
money  dear  by  making  it  scarce;  you  can  make  money  too  cheap  by  making  it 
too  plentiful.  A  dollar  is  a  creature  of  law;  if  you  have  more  dollars  than  are 
necessary  to  keep  pace  with  the  demands  for  money,  then  dollars  will  fall 
in  purchasing  power.  If  the  demand  for  money  increases  more  rapidly  than 
the  number  of  dollars,  then  the  value  of  the  dollar  will  rise.  There  are  some 
people  who  profit  by  a  rising  dollar;  there  are  some  people  who  grow  rich  as  a 
dollar  grows  in  purchasing  power,  and  if  these  people  control  legislation  they 
will  so  control  it  as  to  raise  the  value  of  the  money  which  they  own.  There 
are  those  who  make  a  profit  by  the  negotiation  of  bonds,  and  those  who  profit 
by  bond  sales  are  anxious  for  the  government  to  maintain  a  policy  which  will 
make  frequent  bond  issues  necessar3^  Therefore,  my  friends,  the  question 
as  to  who  shall  determine  the  quantity  of  money  becomes  a  serious  question. 
The  advocates  of  a  gold  standard  insist  that  they  favor  the  gold  standard,  not 
because  of  the  advantage  which  it  brings  them  but  because  of  their  interest  in 
others.  You  may  believe  that  if  you  like,  but  I  do  not.  When  I  find  a  man 
who  wants  a  thing  because  he  thinks  it  is  good  for  himself,  I  recognize  him 
as  a  natural  sort  of  man,  but  when  I  find  a  man  who  always  wants  to  do  some- 
thing for  me  against  my  will;  some  one  who  insists  upon  looking  after  my 
interests  when  I  don't  want  him  to;  and  who  tells  me  that  he  always  feels 
for  me,  I  am  careful  to  see  that  he  does  not  reach  me. 

I  do  not  know  what  these  gold  advocates  may  have  said  in  your  presence 


516'  TRAVELING  WESTWARD. 

but  I  know  that  some  of  them  insist  that  the  New  York  financiers  would 
make  a  great  profit  out  of  free  coinage  if  they  could  only  permit  themselves 
to  enjoy  the  profit.  When  they  tell  me  that  the  financiers  will  profit  by  free 
coinage,  then,  my  friends,  I  conclude  that  the  time  has  come  for  the  masses 
to  pay  back  a  debt  of  gratitude  which  has  been  accumulating  for  twenty  years. 
For  twenty  years  these  financiers,  if  we  can  believe  their  own  report,  have 
been  legislating  for  the  good  of  the  people  even  to  the  neglect  of  themselves.  I 
do  not  think  we  ought  to  permit  them  to  make  this  sacrifice  for  us  always,  and 
when  they  tell  us  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  will  help  them  I  say  that  we 
should  give  them  the  advantage  of  free  coinage  and  permit  them  to  enjoy  it 
to  their  hearts'  content.  If  it  brings  disadvantage  to  us  we  will  endeavor  to 
bear  up  under  the  disadvantage  with  that  fortitude  which  they  have  displayed 
in  enduring  the  gold  standard  for  so  many  years.  If,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they 
believe  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  is  going  to  enrich  them,  why  is  it  that  they 
call  us  anarchists  because  we  are  attempting  to  do  something  for  them? 

Leaving  Wheeling  in  the  night  we  reached  Point  Pleasant  at  an 
early  hour.  My  father's  parents  were  buried  near  this  spot,  and  a  num- 
ber of  relatives  were  present  at  Point  Pleasant.  I  came  near  missing 
this  meeting  because  Mr.  McMillan  was  trying  to  protect  my  sleep. '  The 
Tennessee  Congressman  was  one  of  the  most  considerate  guardians 
whom  I  found  during  the  campaign,  and  when  he  was  endeavoring  to 
secure  rest  for  me  his  humor  supplied  any  missing  links  in  his  logic. 
He  was  the  life  of  the  party  and  never  spared  himself  if  there  was  a 
joke  to  be  related.  As  an  illustration,  I  may  suggest  the  following: 
My  speeches  were  for  the  most  part  brief,  and  he  sometimes  fol- 
lowed me.  On  one  occasion,  when  I  understood  that  he  was  to  speak, 
I  was  surprised  to  find  him  in  the  car  soon  after  I  entered,  and  said  to 
him,  *T  thought  you  were  going  to  follow  me."  He  replied,  "I  did 
follow  you — and  so  did  the  crowd." 

But  to  return  to  the  narrative.  I  came  to  the  rescue  of  the  Point 
Pleasant  committee  and,  in  accordance  with  a  promise  made  the 
night  before,  addressed  the  audience  assembled.  I  here  met  ex-Con- 
gressman James  Capehart,  one  of  the  signers  of  the  address  of 
March  4,  1895. 

The  next  meeting  was  at  Charleston,  followed  by  the  last  meet- 
ing in  the  State,  which  was  held  at  Huntington.  Both  were  largely 
attended.  In  fact,  the  trip  through  West  Virginia  was  a  very  satis- 
factory one,  and  gave  me  an  opportunity  to  meet  many  of  the  promi- 
nent silver  advocates  of  all  parties.  Governor  McCorkle  was  with 
us  during  a  portion  of  the  trip. 

In  the  ride  through  Northern  Kentucky  we  found  the  people 
assembled  at  every  place  where  the  train  stopped,  but  there  was  no 
incident  of  special  importance.     Upon  arrival  in  Cincinnati  our  party 


TRAVELING  WESTWARD.  517 

repaired  to  the  Gibson  House,  where  the  proprietor,  Mr.  H.  B.  Dun- 
bar, one  of  the  best  bimetalHsts,  had  arranged  a  Httle  banquet  for  us. 
The  evening's  work  began  with  a  speech  at  the  Music  Hall  and  ended 
with  an  outdoor  meeting  at  Covington,  Ky. 

The  former  ranked  among  the  largest  of  our  indoor  meetings;  be- 
low will  be  found  a  portion  of  the  speech : 

Cincinnati  Speech. 
Let  me  call  your  attention  to  the  language  used  by  Abraham  Lincoln  in 
criticising  a  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court.  When  you  hear  his  words  you 
will  understand  how  much  more  emphatic  his  language  was  than  our  platform — 
and  yet  there  are  many  people  in  this  country  today  who  think  that  Abraham 
Lincoln  was  not  only  a  great  man,  but  also  a  good  man  and  a  patriot.  He 
said: 

We  believe  as  much  as  Judge  Douglass,  perhaps  more.  In  obedience  to  and  respect 
for  the  judicial  department  of  the  Government.  But  we  think  that  the  Dred  Scott  de- 
cision was  erroneous.  We  know  that  the  court  that  made  it  has  often  overruled  Its  own 
decisions,  and  we  shall  do  what  we  can  to  have  it  overrule  this. 

That,  my  friends,  was  the  position  taken  by  Abraham  Lincoln,  and  that  is 
exactly  the  position  which  we  take  today.  We  expect  that  at  some  time  in  the 
future  that  decision  will  be  overruled;  we  expect  that  at  some  time  in  the  future 
it  will  be  possible  to  make  wealth  bear  its  share  of  the  burdens  of  government. 
It  is  strange  how  suddenly  some  of  these  people  who  have  been  in  court  all  their 
lives  as  defendants,  charged  with  violating  the  law,  it  is  strange,  I  say,  how 
suddenly  they  have  come  to  respect  a  decision  of  the  court.  The  men  who, 
under  the  income  tax  law,  will  be  compelled  to  pay  a  tax,  instead  of  telling  us 
that  they  are  not  willing  to  pay  the  tax,  charge  us  with  disrespect  to  the  court. 
If  these  men,  who  want  the  protection  of  government,  and  yet  .want  others 
to  bear  all  the  burdens  of  government,  were  frank  and  honest,  they  would  tell 
us  that  what  they  object  to  is  not  our  criticism  of  the  court,  but  the  law  itself. 
Which  would  compel  them  to  pay  their  share  of  the  taxes. 

It  was  late  before  we  reached  Covington,  and  I  only  spoke  for  a 
few  moments  at  that  meeting.  While  there  I  was  the  guest  of  one 
of  the  electoral  ticket — ^Judge  James  Tarvin. 

Leaving  Cincinnati  next  morning,  we  passed  through  Indiana, 
stopping,  among  other  places,  at  North  Vernon,  Seymour,  Mitchell, 
Loogootee,  Washington  and  Vincennes.  The  veteran  Congressman, 
W.  S.  Holman,  accompanied  the  party  during  a  portion  of  the  journey. 
The  principal  stops  in  Illinois  were  at  Olney,  Flora,  and  Salem.  Mr. 
McMillan  sang  my  praises  at  Salem,  my  early  home,  and  as  an  evidence 
that  his  remarks  made  a  deep  impression  upon  the  people,  I  record  the 
fact  that  the  Democratic  majority  was  largely  increased  in  the  town 
and  county. 

After  a  brief  stop  at  East  St.  Louis,  where  an  open-air  meeting  was 
held,  we  again  entered  the  trans-Mississippi  territory. 


CHAPTER   XL. 


MEETING  OF  THE  DEMOCRATIC  CLUBS. 

THE  meeting  of  the  Democratic  clubs  of  the  United  States  was 
held  at  St.  Louis  on  the  3d  of  October.  Having  promised 
some  weeks  in  advance  to  attend  this  gathering,  my  dates  were 
so  arranged  as  to  enable  me  to  reach  there  that  evening.  The 
Reception  Committee  took  our  party  to  the  Southern  Hotel,  where  we 
met  Hon.  Chauncey  F.  Black,  of  York,  Pennsylvania,  President  of  the 
National  Association  of  Democratic  Clubs,  Hon.  Lawrence  Gardner, 
of  Washington,  D.  C,  Secretary  of  the  Association,  Senator  H.  D. 
Money,  of  Mississippi,  and  a  number  of  others  prominent  in  the  work. 

The  public  sessions  were  held  at  Convention  Hall.  At  the  after- 
noon session,  Vice-President  Adlai  E.  Stevenson  made  a  very  strong 
speech,  which  was  widely  circulated  during  the  campaign. 

At  the  evening  session  I  delivered  an  address,  which  is  reproduced 
in  full: 

SU  Louis  Speech  Before  the  Democratic  Clubs. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  For  Just  a  little  while  I  ask  your 
attention.  I  desire  to  address  a  few  remarks  to  the  members  of  the  clubs  here 
asseHibled. 

The  clubs  can  be  of  more  service  in  this  campaign  than  in  any  previous 
campaign,  because  in  this  campaign  the  work  is  being  done  by  the  people 
themselves.  Tliese  clubs  have  adopted  a  button  which  presents  the  likeness  of 
Thomas  Jefferson.  If  you  had  searched  through  all  history  you  could  not 
have  found  a  man  more,  worthy  to  be  taken  as  your  ideal  statesman,  because 
in  all  the  history  of  the  human  race  there  has  never  been  but  one  Thomas 
Jeflferson.  Of  all  the  constructive  statesmen  whom  the  world  has  ever  seen, 
Thomas  Jefferson,  in  my  judgment,  stands  first. 

At  a  time  when  representative  government  was  an  experiment,  he  wrote 
that  immortal  document  which  declared  that  among  the  self-evident  truths  were 
these:  that  all  men  are  created  equal,  that  they  are  endowed  with  inalienable 
rights,  that  governments  are  instituted  among  men  to  preserve  these  rights, 
and  that  governments  derive  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed. 
In  stating  those  four  propositions,  he  stated  the  Alpha  and  the  Omega  of 
Democracy.  Men  may  write  books,  men  may  fill  libraries  with  volumes,  but 
they  can  never  improve  upon  that  simple  statement,  recorded  in  a  few  sentences 
and  yet  comprehending  all  that  there  is  in  a  government  of  the  people,  by  the 
people  and  for  the  people. 

In  my  opinion,  no  statesman  ever  lived  who  more  fully  understood  human 

518 


MEETING  OF  THE  DEMOCRATIC  CLUBS.  519 

nature  than  Jefferson  did — no  one  who  more  fully  understood  the  capacity  of  the 
people  for  self-government — no  one  who  more  fully  understood  the  dangers  to 
be  guarded  against.  He  stated  the  principles  which  underlie  Democracy,  and 
then  he  applied  those  principles  to  every  question  which  arose  during  his  time. 
We  today  are  inventing  no  new  principles;  we  are  seeking  to  discover  no  new 
truths;  we  are  simply  applying  to  new  conditions  those  principles  which  must 
forever  live  if  the  people  still  retain  their  love  for  our  form  of  government. 

Since  you  have  chosen  Jefiferson  as  your  ideal,  let  me  read  to  you  the  creed, 
the  articles  of  faith,  set  forth  in  his  first  inaugural  address  and  for  years  recorded 
at  the  platform  of  the  party  which  he  organized.  It  does  us  good  to  re-read 
these  principles  and  renew  our  allegiance  to  them: 

Equal  and  exact  justice  to  all  men  of  whatever  state  or  persuasion,  religious 
or  political. 

That  is  the  first,  that  is  the  fundamental  principle — "Equal  and  exact  justice 
to  all."  Show  me  an  abuse  of  government,  show  me  a  law  which  is  worthy  of 
criticism,  and  I  will  show  you  a  law  which  violates  that  principle  of  equal  and 
exact  justice  to  all. 

The  greatest  danger  which  government  has  to  avoid  is  favoritism.  Favor- 
itism is  the  curse  of  all  governments,  least,  to  be  sure,  among  tl^  governments 
a  government  which  gives  to  none,  which  takes  from  none,  and  a  government 
because  our  government  is  administered  through  human  beings,  and  human 
beings  are  human. 

My  friends,  if  you  would  have  government  just,  if  you  would  have  govern- 
ment fulfill  the  idea  of  a  perfect  government,  you  must  have  a  government 
which  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  a  government  which  deals  with  an  equal  hand, 
a  government  which  gives  to  none,  which  takes  from  none,  and  a  government 
which,  in  the  making  of  the  laws  and  in  the  administration  of  justice,  treats  all 
alike,  and  punishes  the  great  transgressor  as  it  does  the  petty  offender. 

Peace,  commerce  and  honest  friendship  with  all  nations;  entangling  alliance 
with    none. 

Our  position  makes  it  possible  for  us  to  be  more  independent  than  any 
other  nation;  our  position,  our  situation,  our  surroundings  make  it  possible 
for  us  to  have  peace  and  commerce  and  honest  friendship  with  every  nation, 
without  forming  entangling  alliances  with  any  of  them. 

The  support  of  the  state  governments  in  all  their  rights,  as  the  most  competent 
administrations  for  our  domestic  concerns  and  the  surest  bulwarks  against  anti-repub- 
lican   tendencies. 

Our  form  of  government  recognizes  the  right  of  the  States  to  do  certain 
things,  and  the  perpetuity  of  this  nation  depends  as  much  upon  respecting  local 
self-government  as  it  does  upon  recognizing  national  supremacy. 

If  we  neglect  to  preserve  the  local  self-government  provided  by  the  Consti- 
tution, we  encounter  the  danger  which  threatens  this  Government,  as  it  has 
threatened  all  others,  namely,  the  concentration  of  power  in  the  hands  of  a  few 
and  those  few  remote  from  the  people  themselves.  If  we  depart  from  the  idea 
of  local  self-government  we  will  lessen  the  watchful  care  of  the  people  over 
the  government  and  place  them  in  a  position  where  they  will  become  the  vic- 
tims of  any  tyrant  who  seizes  the  reins  of  government  and  uses  force  to  subdue 
a  people  already  half  subdued  by  indifference. 


520  MEETING  OF  THE  DEMOCRA  TIC  CLUBS. 

The  preservation  of  the  general  government  in  its  whole  constitutional  vigor, 
as  the  sheet-anchor  of  our  peace  at  home  and  safety  abroad. 

That,  my  friends,  is  the  statement  of  the  other  half.  Jefferson  believed  in 
preserving  the  rights  of  the  States,  and  yet  he  did  not  abate  in  the  least  the 
power  and  vigor  of  the  Federal  Government  which  extends  over  all.  And  so, 
today,  we  who  follow  him  will  earnestly  preserve  those  rights  which  remain 
with  the  States,  and  we  will  as  firmly  enforce  those  rights  which  belong  to  the 
nation. 

A  jealous  care  of  the  rights  of  election  by  the  people — a  mild  and  safe  corrective 
of  abuses  v^hich  are  lopped  by  the  sword  of  revolution  where  peaceable  remedies  are 
unprovided. 

My  friends,  elections  by  the  people  are  the  safety  valves  in  a  republic.  It 
is  here  that  all  discontent  can  expend  itself,  it  is  here  that  all  criticism  can  find 
an  outlet.  Stop  elections  by  the  people,  and  discontent  must  express  itself  in 
characters  of  blood.  Jefferson  did  not  say  to  preserve  with  jealous  care  elec- 
tions by  corporations;  he  did  not  say  to  preserve  with  jealous  care  elections  by 
a  few  syndicates,  a  few  trusts,  or  even  by  a  few  banking  corporations.  He 
said  "Elections  by  the  people,"  and  he  meant  by  all  the  people. 

Absolute  acquiescence  in  the  decision  of  the  majority— the  vital  principle  of  re- 
publics from  which  there  is  no  appeal  but  to  force,  the  vital  principle  and  the  im- 
mediate   parent    of    despotism. 

Do  our  opponents  say  that  we  believe  in  lawlessness?  I  tell  you  that  the 
followers  of  Thomas  Jeft'erson  are  the  best  preservers  of  public  order,  because 
they  believe  in  absolute  acquiescence  in  the  will  of  the  majority. 

A  well-disciplined  militia,  our  best  reliance  in  peace,  and  for  the  first  moments  of 
war,   till   the  regulars  may   relieve  them. 

Far  better  this  form  of  protection  than  an  enormous  standing  army,  sup- 
ported by  the  taxation  of  those  who  toil. 

The  supremacy  of  the  civil  over  the  military  authority. 

Economy  in  the  public  expenses,  that  labor  may  be  lightly  burdened. 

The  honest  payment  of  our  debts  and  sacred  preservation  of  the  public  faith. 

My  friends,  the  followers  of  Thomas  Jefferson  stand  as  squarely  upon  that 
plank  of  his  platform  as  they  do  upon  any  other  plank  that  I  have  read. 

The  honest  payment  of  our  debts  and  sacred  preservation  of  the  public  faith. 

That  does  not  mean  that  after  you  have  contracted  a  debt  you  shall  lessen 
the  volume  of  standard  money  and  drive  up  the  value  of  the  dollar  and  then 
compel  people  to  pay  in  larger  dollars  than  they  borrowed. 

Both  houses  of  Congress,  in  1878,  declared  by  resolution  that  it  was  not 
a  violation  of  public  faith  to  pay  coin  obligations  in  silver  coin  as  well  as  gold 
coin.  We  have  sold  coin  bonds,  and  some  of  those  bonds  were  sold  at  a  lower 
price  than  they  would  have  brought  had  they  been  payable  in  gold;  and  yet, 
my  friends,  those  who  bought  those  bonds,  and  who  made  allowance  for  the 
fact  that  they  were  payable  in  coin,  now  insist  that  the  Government  is  bound, 
in  good  faith,  to  pay  them  in  gold,  so  that  that  allowance  can  be  profit  in  their 
pockets.  We  believe  in  the  payment  of  our  debts  according  to  contract — not 
according  to  the  wishes  of  those  who  hold  the  contracts. 

Encouragement  of  agriculture  and  commerce  as  its  hand-maid. 

Jefferson  recognized  that  agriculture  is  the  great  foundation  industry  in 


MEETING  OF  THE  DEMOCRATIC  CLUBS.  521 

this  country.  He  recognized  that  without  prosperity  among  those  who  till  the 
soil  and  convert  a  nation's  resources  into  a  nation's  wealth  there  can  be  no  per- 
manent prosperity  anywhere;  and  yet,  in  spite  of  this  fact  which  every  one  must 
recognize,  for  the  last  twenty  years,  instead  of  encouraging  agriculture,  we 
have  discouraged  it — instead  of  giving  it  an  equal  chance,  we  have  so  burdened 
those  who  work  on  the  farms  that  their  sons  are  driven  from  the  old  home 
to  become  competitors  with  the  mechanics  in  the  shops. 

The  diffusion  of  information  and  the  arraignment  of  all  abuses  at  the  bar 
of  public   reason. 

Jefferson  was  right.  He  believed  that  error  is  harmless  when  reason  is  left 
free  to  combat  it.  Far  better  can  we  endure  whatever  injury  may  come  from 
error  than  to  attempt  to  suppress  free  speech  and  thus  risk  the  suppression  of 
the  good  along  with  the  evil. 

Freedom  of  religion;  freedom  of  the  press;  freedom  of  the  person  under  the 
protection  of  habeas  corpus,  and  trial  by  juries  impartially  selected. 

These,  my  friends,  were  the  principles  which  he  laid  down,  and  they  were 
sufficient  to  cover  all  the  conditions  which  existed  then.  And  then,  as  an 
explanation  of  these  principles,  he  added: 

These  principles  form  the  bright  constellation  which  has  gone  before  us,  and 
guided  our  steps  through  an  age  of  revolution  and  reformation.  The  wisdom  of  our 
sages  and  the  blood  of  our  heroes  have  been  devoted  to  the  attainment.  They  should 
be  the  creed  of  our  political  faith — the  text  of  civil  instruction— the  touch-stone  by 
which  to  try  the  services  of  those  whom  we  trust;  and  should  we  wander  from 
them  in  moments  of  error  or  alarm,  let  us  hasten  to  retrace  our  steps  and  regain 
the  road  which  leads  alone  to  peace,  liberty  and  safety. 

I  have  read  you,  thus  briefly,  from  the  teachings  of  Thomas  Jefferson.  It 
ought  to  be  the  ambition  of  every  member  of  these  clubs  to  carry  our  Govern- 
ment back  and  place  it  again  securely  upon  the  foundation  that  that  immortal 
statesman  laid. 

If  you  ask  me  what  is  my  highest  ambition,  I  reply  that  above  all  offices 
that  human  hands  can  give,  above  all  honors  which  confidence  and  esteem  can 
bestow,  if  I  could  choose  the  language  by  which  my  public  work  is  to  be 
described,  I  would  have  history  say  of  me:  He  did  what  he  could  to  make  the 
Government  what  Jefferson  desired  it  to  be. 

My  friends,  our  Government  has  drifted  away  from  the  ancient  landmarks. 
In  times  of  passion  and  in  times  of  party  strife  the  instrumentalities  of  govern- 
ment have  been  turned  to  private  gain,  and  Government,  instead  of  meting  out 
equal  and  exact  justice,  has  been  too  often  the  tool  of  those  who,  having 
obtained  possession  of  it,  have  used  it  to  enrich  themselves  out  of  the  toil  and 
sweat  of  their  fellow  man. 

Today  we  meet  in  the  presence  of  a  mighty  conflict — the  greatest  conflict 
that  this  nation  has  ever  seen  in  time  of  peace.  Upon  the  other  side  are 
arrayed  forces  of  tremendous  power.  We  need  not  overlook,  we  need  not 
belittle  the  importance  of  the  influences  which  oppose  us.  Behind  the  bulwark 
erected  by  our  opponents  has  been  gathered  every  public  enemy  who  preys 
upon  the  people.  They  need  contribute  but  a  small  proportion  of  the  unjust 
gains  that  they  have  wrung  from  the  public  through  vicious  legislation,  and  yet 
that  small  proportion  will  be  a  corruption  fund  the  like  of  which  was  never 
collected  by  any  party  before.     Against  this  enemy,  armed  with  all  the  imple- 


522  MEETING  OF  THE  DEMOCRA  TIC  CLUBS. 

merits  of  party  warfare — against  this  enemy,  supplied  with  all  the  equipments 
which  are  supposed  to  be  valuable  in  such  a  conflict — against  this  enemy,  con- 
fident, arrogant  and  insolent,  we  have  nothing  to  oppose  except  the  consciences 
of  seventy  millions  of  people. 

My  friends,  the  patriots  who  live  fifty  years  from  now,  reading  the  pages  of 
history,  will  envy  us  who  live  in  this  day  of  such  wonderful  opportunities.  I 
was  born  after  the  war.  I  belong  to  that  generation  which  has  never  had  an 
opportunity  to  prove  its  love  of  country  upon  the  battlefield;  but,  oh,  my 
countrymen,  never  in  the  history  of  this  country  has  there  been  such  an  oppor- 
tunity as  there  is  today  for  the  citizen  to  prove  his  love,  not  only  of  his  country 
but  of  all  mankind  and  of  his  God.  The  battle  that  we  fight  is  fought  upon  the 
hilltop,  and  our  contending  armies  are  visible  to  all  the  world.  All  over  this 
globe,  in  every  civilized  nation,  the  eyes  of  mankind  are  turned  toward  this 
battlefield.  Show  me,  anywhere,  a  man  oppressed,  show  me  a  man  who  has 
suffered  from  injustice,  show  me  a  man  who  has  been  made  the  victim  of  vicious 
legislation,  and  I  will  show  you  a  man  from  whose  heart  goes  up  a  silent  prayer 
that  we  may  win.  Show  me,  anywhere,  an  aristocrat  who  despises  the  common 
people  and  considers  them  inferior  beings,  show  me  a  king  who  is  jealous  of 
the  rights  his  subjects  have,  show  me  a  man  who  knows  nothing  but  the  thirst 
for  gold,  show  me  any  monopolist  that  lives  by  the  oppression  of  his  fellow 
men,  anywhere,  and  I  will  show  you  a  man  who  is  hoping  that  success  may 
come  to  those  who  oppose  us. 

One  cablegram  brings  news  that  a  subscription  paper  has  been  opened  in 
a  foreign  banking  centre  to  supply  funds  for  the  already  overflowing  treasury 
of  our  opponents;  and  the  same  wire  flashes  from  Budapest  the  news  that  the 
farmers  of  the  old  world  are  anxious  that  bimetallism  may  be  restored  here. 

Such,  my  friends,  is  the  opportunity  now  open  before  those  who  desire  to 
make  our  Government  so  good  that  it  will  deserve  the  love  of  every  citizen  who 
lives  beneath  the  flag — such  is  the  contest  into  which  circumstances  have  hurled 
you,  and  you  cannot  evade  or  avoid  your  responsibility  if  you  would.  You  must 
act.  The  bible  tells  us  that  much  shall  be  required  of  those  to  whom  much  has 
been  given;  and  to  you,  the  citizens  in  this,  the  foremost  nation  of  the  world, 
to  you  the  citizens  in  this  land  which  must  lead  in  the  progress  of  the  race  to 
higher  ground — to  youTs  given  the  opportunity,  and  that  opportunity  measures 
your  responsibility.  I  beg  you,  members  of  these  clubs,  to  appreciate  the  grav- 
ity of  the  situation,  and  to  do  your  duty  as  you  see  it. 

Let  me  suggest  an  avenue  of  usefulness.  We  believe  that  our  cause  is  just. 
We  believe  that,  if  that  cause  can  be  presented  to  the  people,  they  will  appreciate 
its  justice.  We  believe  that,  if  the  arguments  which  support  our  position  can  be 
laid  before  the  intelligent  and  the  impartial,  those  arguments  must  convince. 
But,  my  friends,  we  find  it  difficult  to  raise  even  the  amount  of  money  necessary 
to  print  and  circulate  the  literature  which  is  asked  for  by  the  people.  Hereto- 
fore we  have  sent  out  literature  and  begged  men  to  have  others  take  it.  This 
year  we  are  not  able  to  supply  the  demand  that  comes  from  those  who  beg  for 
literature.  Let  me  suggest  one  thing  that  these  clubs  can  do.  Each  club  can 
take  up  a  collection  from  among  its  members,  and  it  can  purchase  literature 
and  circulate  that  literature  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  club;  and  thus  this 


MEETING  OF  THE  DEMOCRATIC  CLUBS.  523 

argument  will  extend  and  the  circles,  ever  widening,  will  at  last  reach  all  who 
desire  to  study  this  question. 

But  there  is  another  thing  that  you  can  do.  I  ask  all  the  clubs,  of  whatever 
name,  composed  of  members  who  believe  in  the  restoration  of  bimetallism  by 
this  nation  alone,  to  meet  at  the  polling  places  on  election  morning,  and  give 
the  entire  day  to  work  for  their  country.  More  than  that;  we  are  not  able  to 
furnish  the  funds  necessary  to  hire  carriages  to  bring  in  those  who  are  unable 
to  walk.  I  believe  that  fewer  carriages  will  be  needed  this  year  than  ordinarily, 
because  more  people  will  be  anxious  to  go  to  the  polls  this  year  than  ever 
before.  But  I  ask  you  to  furnish  conveyances  "when  you  meet  at  the  polls. 
Furnish  carriages,  or  buggies,  or  wagons,  or  carts,  or  anything  that  you  have; 
if  you  give  what  you  have,  you  have  given  as  generously  as  those  who  give 
much. 

I  beg,  too,  that  each  one  of  you  will  consider  himself  appointed  a  mission- 
ary, so  that,  from  now  until  election  day,  no  moment  will  be  lost;  every  mo- 
ment should  be  employed  in  bringing  our  cause  to  the  attention  of  others. 

More  than  that,  I  want  you,  when  you  leave  here,  to  carry  with  you  the 
word  that  we  do  not  want  any  employer  of  labor  to  ;  ttempt  to  interfere  with 
his  men  or  to  try  to  make  them  vote  for  our  ticket  against  their  will.  As  the 
presidential  nominee  of  the  triple  alliance,  I  want  to  say  to  you,  my  friends, 
that  I  do  not  desire  the  involuntary  support  of  any  citizen  in  this  nation.  We 
appeal  to  the  people,  we  submit  our  cause  to  the  judgment  of  the  people,  and  if 
I  am  elected  I  want  to  feel  that  behind  me  I  have  a  majority  of  these  people, 
and  then,  so  help  me  God,  I  will  carry  out  that  platform  to  the  letter. 

Be  not  terrified  by  abuse,  be  not  discouraged  by  epithets.  No  matter  what 
names  they  may  call  you,  if  you  are  conscious  that  you  are  doing  your  duty, 
you  have  more  support  than  you  would  have  if  all  the  world  applauded  you  and 
yowr  own  conscience  condemned.  Abuse  has  always  been  the  lot  of  those  who 
fought  against  entrenched  privilege.  If  you  become  annoyed,  turn  back  to  the 
pages  of  history,  and  for  every  name  that  is  applied  to  you,  you  will  find  cne 
equally  severe  applied  to  Jefferson — for  every  name  applied  to  you,  you  will  find 
one  equally  severe  applied  to  Jackson.  Ah,  my  friends,  I  might  come  nearer  than 
that.  That  great  spirit  yonder  (pointing  to  a  picture  of  Lincoln)  was  as  bit- 
terly attacked  by  the  aristocracy  of  wealth  and  would  be  as  unpopular  today 
among  the  financiers  of  New  York  or  Boston  as  Jackson  or  Jefferson  was  in  his 
day.  Any  man  who  believes  that  the  people  ought  to  stand  equal  befoie  the  law 
will  be  abused  by  those  who  desire  favoritism  in  legislation  and  special  priv- 
ileges from  government. 

Be  not  terrified.  Do  your  duty  as  you  see  it.  I  believe  that  we  shall  tri- 
umph. I  believe,  that  as  surely  as  tomorrow  morning's  sun  shall  rise,  the  day 
will  come  when  bimetallism  will  be  restored.  Yes,  the  day  will  come  when  the 
money  of  the  Constitution  will  again  be  ours;  the  day  will  come  when  trusts  will 
be  exterminated;  the  day  will  come  when  corporations  will  cease  to  consider 
themselves  greater  than  the  Government  which  created  them;  the  day  will  come 
when  the  people  of  this  country  will  be  content  to  walk  side  by  side,  each  one 
satisfied  to  enjoy  life  and  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  without  attempt- 
ing to  deprive  his  neighbor  of  equal  opportunities  and  equal  rights. 

There  is  nothing,  my  friends,  which  so  inspires  as  truth.     Those  who  fight 


524  MEETING  OF  THE  DEMOCRATIC  CLUBS. 

with  the  consciousness  that  they  are  right,  fight  on  with  perfect  confidence  that, 

even  if  they  themselves  do  not  live  to  see  the  triumph  of  their  cause,  yet  it  will 

triumph  after  they  are  gone.     If  they  die  while  the  contest  is  still  undecided, 

they  die  in  the  faith  expressed  by  the  poet  as  he  wrote  of  one  who  fell  upon  the 

battlefield: 

Yea,  though  thou  lie  upon  the  dust. 

When  they  who  helped  thee   flee  in  fear. 
Die  full  of  hope  and  manly  trust 

Like  those  who  fell  in  battle  here. 

Another  hand-  thy  sword  shall  wield, 
Another  hand  the  standard  wave. 
Till  from  the  trumpet's  mouth  is  pealed 
The  blast  of  triumph  o'er  thy  grave. 

The  National  Association  of  Democratic  Clubs,  under  the  very 
efficient  management  of  the  president  and  secretary,  did  splendid  work 
during  the  campaign,  and  deserves  honorable  mention. 


CHAPTER  XLI. 


TO  CHICAGO  VIA  TENNESSEE, 

BY  this  time  I  felt  the  need  of  rest,  and  Sunday,  October  4th,  was 
spent  in  an  endeavor  to  obtain  it.  In  the  evening  the  Mem- 
phis committee  took  our  party  in  charge  and  landed  us  in  that 
city  in  time  for  breakfast.  The  meeting  here  was  held  outdoors,  and 
was  largely  attended.  I  took  advantage  of  the  occasion  to  say  a  word 
in  behalf  of  Hon.  E.  W.  Carmack,  the  Democratic  candidate  for  Con- 
gress in  that  district,  who,  both  when  editor  of  the  Commercial  Ap- 
peal, and  afterwards  upon  the  stump,  has  done  splendid  work  in  behalf 
of  bimetallism.  Senator  Isham  G.  Harris,  to  whose  labors  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Democratic  National  Silver  Committee  I  have  already 
referred,  presided  at  the  meeting,  and  there  were  upon  the  platform 
many  who  had  taken  an  active  part  in  the  movement  which  resulted 
in  the  capture  of  the  Chicago  convention. 

From  Memphis  we  proceeded  to  Nashville,  by  way  of  McKenzie, 
stopping  for  a  short  time  at  the  principal  towns  along  the  way. 

The  reception  at  Nashville  was  a  very  cordial  one.  Three  outdoor 
meetings  had  been  provided  for,  the  first — a  very  large  one — in  the 
market  square.  This  meetijig  is  remembered  especially  because  of 
the  excellent  rendition  of  "Home,  Sweet  Home"  by  a  male  glee  club. 

The  third  meeting  of  the  evening  was  held  under  the  auspices  of 
the  Populist  committee,  and  was  presided  over  by  Prof.  A.  L.  Mimms, 
the  Populist  candidate  for  Governor.  The  speech  here  was  brief,  and 
I  referred  to  the  fact  that  they  had  two  electoral  tickets  and  explained 
that,  where  such  was  the  case,  I  was  running  against  myself.  The 
Populists  afterward  withdrew  their  electoral  ticket  and  supported  ours. 
The  evening  ended  with  a  banquet  at  the  Nicholson  House,  where  a 
number  of  the  leading  bimetallists  of  the  city  were  assembled.  Sixteen 
young  ladies  from  Belmont  College  waited  on  the  table,  and  each  pre- 
sented a  flower  to  the  guest  of  the  evening.  Among  the  mementos  of 
the  occasion   I  carried  away  a  hickory  stick,  taken  from  the  Hermitage. 

Here  I  met  Hon.  J.  W.  Gaines,  candidate  for  Congress,  Col.  Colyer, 
a  veteran  bimetallist,  ex-Congressman  Enloe,  a  former  colleague, 
and  many  others  with  whom  I  became  acquainted  when,  just  after 

525 


526  TO  CHICAGO  VIA   TENNESSEE. 

the  adjournment  of  the  Fifty-Third  Congress,  I  delivered  a  lecture 
in  that  city.  Here,  too,  I  parted  with  my  faithful  McMillan,  who 
had  almost  exhausted  himself  in  his  efforts  to  save  me  from  ex- 
haustion. Hon.  John  W.  Tomlinson,  of  Birmingham,  Alabama,  one 
of  the  Democratic  National  Silver  Committee,  and  a  delegate  to 
the  Chicago  convention,  joined  me  at  this  point,  and  accompanied  me 
for  more  than  two  weeks. 

Our  party  left  Nashville  about  midnight,  and  entered  Indiana  at 
JefTersonville,  early  in  the  morning.  Here  Governor  Matthews,  Chair- 
man Martin,  of  the  State  committee.  National  Committeeman  Shank- 
lin,  and  a  number  of  others  met  us,  and  continued  with  us  during 
the  two  days'  trip  through  Indiana.  Stops  were  made  at  all  the  im- 
portant towns,  among  them  New  Albany,  Scottsburg,  Seymour,  Co- 
lumbus, and  Franklin.  Four  meetings  were  held  in  Indianapolis,  Gov- 
ernor Claude  Matthews  presiding  at  the  principal  ones.  The  first 
and  largest  gathering  was  in  the  Capitol  grounds.  Below  will  be  found 
a  portion  of  the  speech  delivered  here : 

Indianapolis  Speech — At  the  Capitol* 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  It  gives  me  great  pleasure  to  visit 
Indianapolis.  I  recall  that  Hon.  Thomas  A.  Hendricks,  a  citizen  of  this  city 
and  State,  and  at  that  time  a  candidate  for  the  Vice-Presidency,  was  the  first 
great  Democratic  leader  whom  I  ever  saw,  and  such  was  my  admiration  for 
his  life  and  character  that  my  first  political  pilgrimage  was  made  to  this  city 
to  attend  his  funeral.  Therefore  I  think  of  him  on  my  return  to  this  city, 
and  I  think  of  the  principles  for  which  he  so  ably  contended.  I  am  here  today 
to  advocate  the  principles  which  are  democratic  in  the  broadest  sense  of  that 
term;  when  the  fundamental  principles  of  democracy  are  understood  they  are 
loved  and  respected  by  all,  irrespective  of  name,  who  believe  in  a  govern- 
ment of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for  the  people. 

This  city  enjoys  the  unique  distinction  of  being  ihe  birthplace  and  the 
deathbed  of  a  so-called  party.  I  know  that  when  I  speak  of  this  so-called  party 
I  am  disobeying  the  Bible  injunction — let  the  dead  bury  their  dead.  I  speak  of 
this  so-called  party  as  I  would  not  speak  of  any  bona  fide  organization  of  men 
because  it  occupies  a  peculiar  place  in  history.  It  calls  itself  a  national  party 
when  it  does  not  expect  to  carry  a  single  county  in  the  entire  nation.  It  calls 
itself  a  Democratic  party  when  it  was  organized  for  the  express  purpose  of 
electing  a  Republican  candidate  for  the  Presidency.  If  it  were  big  enough  to 
justify  the  name,  I  would  call  it  a  stupendous  fraud,  but  it  is  too  small — I 
will  call  it  a  transparent  fraud.  It  is  the  first  political  convention  ever 
held  in  this  country  where  the  delegates  nominated  a  ticket  which  they 
did  not  expect  to  vote  for;  and  the  first  time  when  men  ever  received  a 
nomination  and  did  not  want  to  be  voted  for. 

The  minority  in  the  Chicago  convention  opposed  free  coinaga  on  the 
ground  that  it  would  interfere  with  international  bimetallism,  toward  which 


TO   CHICAGO   VIA   TENNESSEE.  527 

they  said  the  efforts  of  this  government  should  be  steadily  directed,  and  when 
they  failed  to  secure  the  adoption  of  that  plank  at  Chicago  they  assembled  in 
convention  here  and  forgot  to  mention  international  bimetallism.  There  could 
be  no  clearer  evidence  of  intended  deception  than  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the 
minority  at  Chicago,  when  they  at  last  reached  z:  convention  where  they  had 
things  all  their  own  way,  repudiated  the  plank  which  they  stood  on  there,  and 
came  out  in  favor  of  the  gold  standard  instead  of  international  bimetallism. 
My  friends,  I  am  willing  to  meet  an  open  enemy  in  an  open  field,  and  concede 
to  that  enemy  all  the  rights  and  privileges  of  honorable  warfare,  but  when 
our  opponents  call  themselves  the  advocates  of  sound  money  while  they 
endeavor  to  fasten  upon  us  an  unsound  financial  system — when  they  call  them- 
selves the  advocates  of  honest  money  and  then  deal  dishonestly  with  the 
American  people,  they  do  not  deserve  to  be  treated  like  honorable  enemies.  I 
have  no  criticism  to  make  of  any  man  who,  believing  that  the  election  of  the 
Chicago  ticket  would  injure  this  country,  votes  the  Republican  ticket,  but,  my 
friends,  when  I  find  a  man  who  wants  to  elect  the  Republican  ticket  but  has 
not  the  courage  to  bear  the  odium  of  advocating  it,  I  have  not  so  much  respect 
for  him.     (A  voice:     "Bynum,  Bynum.") 

That  reminds  me  what  that  distinguished  citizen  once  said.  (A  voice:  "Ex- 
tinguished citizen.")  A  gentleman  suggests  that  he  is  an  extinguished  citizen, 
but  I  will  say  distinguished  citizen  because  he  has  a  past  whether  he  has  any 
future  or  not.  If  you  want  to  know  what  he  said  about  the  gold  standard, 
listen  while  I  read  from  his  speech  in  Congress  on  silver  in  i886: 

Again,  the  advocates  of  gold  approach  us  with  open  hands  and  smiling  countenances 
but  I  fear  with  a  dagger  concealed  beneath  their  cloaks. 

Ah,  my  friends,  he  knew  the  nature  of  the  animal  before  he  began  to 
associate  with  it.  He  is  right  in  his  description.  The  gold  standard  never 
fought  an  open  fight.  It  carries  the  knife  of  the  assassin  and  does  its  work 
behind  the  mask  of  the  burglar.  It  is  not  an  open  enemy,  never  was  and 
never  will  be. 

I  will  also  quote  to  you  what  Mr.  Bynum  quoted  in  that  speech  from 
Senator  Ingalls.     Now  note  the  language  quoted  from  Senator  Ingalls: 

No  enduring  fabric  of  national  prosperity  can  be  builded  on  gold.  Gold  is  the 
money  of  monarchs;  kings  covet  it,  the  exchanges  are  affected  by  it;  its  tendency 
is  to  accumulate  in  vast  masses  in  the  commercial  centers  and  to  move  from  kingdom 
to  kingdom  in  such  volumes  as  to  unsettle  values  and  disturb  the  finances  of  the 
world;  it  is  the  instrument  of  gamblers  and  speculators,  and  the  idol  of  the  miser  and 
thief;  being  the  object  of  so  much  adoration  it  becomes  haughty  and  sensitive,  and 
shrinks  at  the  approach  of  danger,  and  whenever  it  is  raost  needed  it  always  disappears; 
at  the  slightest  alarm  it  begins  to  look  for  refuge;  it  flies  from  the  nation  at  war  to 
the  nation  at  peace;  war  makes  it  a  fugitive;  no  people  in  a  great  emergency  ever 
found  a  faithful  ally  in  gold;  it  is  the  most  cowardly  and  treacherous  of  all  metals; 
it  makes  no  treaty  that  it  does  not  break,  it  has  no  friend  whom  it  does  not  sooner 
or  later  betray.  Armies  and  navies  are  not  maintained  by  gold;  in  times  of  panic  and 
cj.lamity,  shipwreck  and  disaster,  it  becomes  the  chief  agent  and  minister  of  ruin,  no 
nation  ever  fought  a  great  war  by  the  aid  of  gold;  on  the  contrary,  in  the  crises  6f 
greatest  peril  It  becomes  an  enemy  more  potent  than  the  foe  in  the  field,  but  when 
the  battle  is  won  and  peace  has  been  secured,  gold  reappears  and  claims  the  fruits  of 
victory. 

My  friends,  these  are  the  words  of  the  distinguished  Senator.  Mr.  Bynum 
once  quoted  them  and  the  words  are  true.  Gold  is  arrogant  and  tyrannical  in  time 


528  TO  CHICAGO   VIA    TENNESSEE. 

of  peace,  and  it  deserts  any  nation  in  time  of  war,  and  never  is  a  friend  when 
a  friend  is  needed. 

Many  reasons  might  be  given  to  show  why  the  poUcy  which  we  advocate 
is  democratic.  In  the  first  place,  our  policy  has  the  endorsement  of  the 
Democratic  National  Convention,  and  that  is  sufficient  to  determine  what 
democracy  is  today.  There  must  be  majority  rule  or  minority  rule,  and 
democracy  has  always  meant  the  rule  of  the  majority,  and  a  majority  of  the 
Democrats  of  the  nation,  acting  with  more  freedom  and  directness  than  in  any 
convention  before,  have  declared  that  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver 
at  i6  to  I  without  waiting  for  any  other  nation  is  democratic. 

But  there  is  another  thing  that  convinces  us  that  our  position  is  democratic. 
Every  undemocratic  influence  in  the  country  is  arrayed  against  us.  Every 
man  who  has  profited  by  special  legislation,  every  trust  that  seeks  to  impose 
upon  the  people,  every  syndicate  that  fattens  upon  public  adversity,  and  every 
corporation  that  thinks  that  it  is  greater  than  the  Government  which  created  it — 
all  these  are  opposed  to  us,  and  give  us  assurance  that  we  are  doing  good  work 
for  the  people. 

Again,  if  you  will  look  at  those  who  have  opposed  democracy  in  the  past, 
you  will  learn  that  *our  position  is  correct.  Let  me  read  you  what  Thomas 
Jefferson  said  in  1800  of  the  combination  which  was  then  opposing  democracy. 
In  writing  to  a  friend  who  had  gone  abroad,  he  said: 

The  aspect  of  our  politics  has  wonderfully  changed  since  you  left.  In  place  of  the 
noble  love  of  liberty  and  republican  government  which  carried  us  triumphantly  through 
the  war,  an  Anglican  party  has  sprung  up  whose  avowed  purpose  It  Is  to  draw  us  over  to 
the  substance  as  they  have  already  done  to  the  form  of  British  government.  While  the 
main  body  of  our  citizens  remain  true  to  republican  institutions,  against  us  are  the 
executive,  the  federal  judiciary,  two  out  of  three  branches  of  the  legislature,  all  the 
officers  of  the  Government,  all  timid  men  who  prefer  the  calm  of  despotism  to  the  boisterous 
sea  of  liberty,  all  British  merchants  and  Americans  trading  on  British  capital,  all 
speculators  and  bond  brokers,  and  with  them  the  banks  and  dealers  in  public  funds  and 
United  States  bonds — contrivances  Invented  for  the  purpose  of  corruption,  and  for 
assimilating  to  the  rotten  as  well  as  to  the  sound  parts  of  the  British  model.  It  would 
give  you  a  fever  if  I  were  to  name  to  you  the  apostates  who  have  gone  over  to  these 
heresies— men  who  were  once  Solomons  in  council  and  Samsons  in  the  field.  In  short,  we 
are  likely  to  preserve  the  liberty  we  have  obtained  only  by  unremitting  perils,  but 
we  shall  preserve  it. 

My  friends,  these  are  the  words  in  which  Jefferson  described  the  opposition 
to  the  Democratic  party  in  1800 — just  ninety-six  years  ago.  It  is  the  same 
opposition  that  we  have  to  meet  now.  Show  me  a  man  who  goes  to  Europe 
oftener  than  he  crosses  the  Mississippi  river,  and  I  will  show  you  a  man  who 
thinks  that  this  country  cannot  do  anything  unless  England  helps  to  do  it 
Show  me  a  man  who  thinks  that  this  nation  cannot  be  survived  unless  it  trades 
on  British  capital;  show  me  a  man  who  thinks  that  our  financial  system  ought 
to  have  for  its  object  the  borrowing  of  money  from  abroad,  and  I  will  show 
you  a  man  who  would  make  the  people  of  this  country  bow  their  necks  to 
foreign  oppression  and  accept  whatever  financial  policy  our  creditors  desire 
to  force  upon  us. 

It  seems  that  there  were  apostates  in  those  days  also,  and  it  seems  that 
they  were  Solomons  in  council  and  Samsons  in  the  field.  Why,  you  would 
suppose  that  JeflFerson  was  describing  the  present  condition,  because  every 
man  who  leaves  the  Democratic  party  this  year  is  willing  to  make  affidavit 


H 
M 
(/I 

O 

•-H 

H 


< 
o 

»— I 

H 

> 

O 
U 


TO  CHICAGO   VIA    TENNESSEE.  531 

that  he  is  a  Solomon  in  council  and  that  he  has  been  a  Samson  in  the  field. 
But  Jefferson  said  that  the  Government  would  be  preserved  in  spite  of  them. 
He  said  that  the  liberties  of  the  people  would  be  preserved  in  spite  of  them, 
and,  my  friends,  I  believe  that  the  same  can  be  said  now.  We  can  lose  those 
leaders  who  have  been — not  argued  out  but — pulled  out  of  the  Democratic 
party  by  great  corporate  interests,  and  yet  the  Democratic  party  will  survive 
to  battle  for  the  people.  For  every  Democrat  who  is  drawn  away  from  his 
moorings  by  some  sub-marine  cable,  we  will  gain  some  Republicans  who  still 
believe  that  this  nation  ought  to  have  its  own  business  attended  to  by  its 
own  people. 

We  have  commenced  a  warfare  against  the  gold  standard,  and  we  expect 
to  continue  that  warfare  until  there  will  not  be  a  man  in  this  country  who  will 
dare  to  raise  his  voice  in  favor  of  the  gold  standard.  We  believe  in  bimetallism; 
it  has  been  the  policy  of  this  country  in  the  past.  All  parties  have  declared  for 
it  time  and  again.  The  American  people  are  today  wedded  to  bimetallism  by 
tradition  and  interest,  and  the  party  which  refuses  to  support  bimetallism  will 
find  itself  divorced  from  all  the  offices  in  the  United  States. 

Our  opponents  tell  us  that  if  we  have  free  coinage  we  will  go  to  the 
standard  of  Mexico.  Why  do  they  not  say  that  if  we  maintain  the  gold 
standard  we  will  approach  the  conditiqp  of  Turkey,  which  has  a  gold  standard? 
I  understand  that  the  Armenians  have  recently  been  called  anarchists  by  those 
who  are  in  authority  in  Turkey,  and  I  suppose  from  that  that  they  are  in  favor 
of  bimetallism  and  have  raised  their  voices  against  the  gold  standard  in  Turkey. 
They  call  us  anarchists  over  here  because  we  are  opposed  to  allowing  foreign 
nations  to  make  a  financial  policy  and  then  force  it  upon  us  whether  we  like 
it  or  not.  As  I  looked  into  the  faces  of  the  members  of  the  various  clubs  that 
escorted  me  from  the  depot  to  the  hotel  and  into  the  faces  of  the  people  who 
lined  the  streets,  I  wondered,  if  these  were  anarchists,  how  the  patriots  of  this 
country  would  look  if  we  could  get  them  together  in  one  place  and  gaze  upon 
them.  If  those  who  are  assembled  here  today  and  in  similar  meetings  through- 
out the  country  are  really  enemies  of  this  country,  I  would  like  to  know  how 
this  country  is  to  be  saved  from  its  enemies.  The  men  who  insist  on  doing  our 
legislating  in  time  of  peace  as  a  rule  never  fight  any  battles  in  time  of  war. 

We  are  in  favor  of  the  money  of  the  Constitution.  It  was  good  enough  in 
1884.  Our  national  platform  declared  that  year  in  favor  of  honest  money — 
and  it  did  not  stop  there  as  the  advocates  of  so-called  honest  money  do  today, 
but  went  on  and  defined  what  honest  money  was.  That  platform  declared  that 
the  Democratic  party  favored  "honest  money,  the  gold  and  silver  coinage  of 
the  Constitution."  That  platform  was  good  enough  to  elect  a  President  and 
Vice-President  on  in  1884.  In  1888  the  Democratic  platform  reiterated  the 
platform  of  1884.     The  platform  of  1892  said: 

We  hold  to  the  use  of  gold  and  silver  as  the  standard  money  of  the  country, 
and  to  the  coinage  of  both  gold  and  silver  without  discriminating  against  metal  or  charge 
for    mintage. 

Some  qualifying  words  were  then  added  which  were  intended  as  steps  down 

.  so  that  the  man  who  ran  upon  the  platform  could  go  off  of  it  as  soon  as  he  was 

elected.     But  that  platform  did  not  declare  for  a  gold  standard.     That  platform 

recognized  the  principle   of  bimetallism   and   demanded   that  gold  and  silver 


532  TO  CHICAGO  VIA   TENNESSEE. 

should  be  treated  exactly  alike  as  the  money  metals  of  this  country,  and  yet, 
my  friends,  the  financiers  have  succeeded  in  the  past  in  inserting  an  ambiguous 
phrase  so  that  the  men  elected  on  the  platform  could  refuse  to  carry  out  its 
spirit. 

The  next  meeting  in  size  was  at  Tomlinson  Hall,  in  the  evening,  the 
house  being  crowded.  To  the  traveling  men,  who  assembled  in  the 
corridors  of  the  hotel,  and  insisted  upon  a  few  remarks,  I  said : 

Indianapolis  Speech — To  the  Traveling  Men. 

Gentlemen:  I  appreciate  the  invitation  extended  by  the  traveling  men 
to  say  a  word  to  them,  and  I  appreciate  the  honor  of  an  introduction 
to  the  traveling  men  by  a  traveling  man  who  became  a  supporter  of  mine 
after  he  had  read  the  letter  of  acceptance  of  the  Republican  candidate.  I  value 
the  support  of  traveling  men  for  two  reasons.  In  the  first  place,  as  a  class 
they  average  high  in  intelligence — no  class  of  people  has  a  higher  average 
of  intelligence — and  when  I  have  the  support  of  traveling  men  they  cannot 
say  that  my  cause  appeals  to  unthinking  people.  The  traveling  men  think. 
Their  minds  are  active  and  it  is  only  another  proof  that  bimetallism  com- 
mends itself  to  those  who  will  reason,  who  will  study  and  who  will  investigate. 
I  am  glad  to  have  their  support  for  another  reason.  They  are  not  only 
intelligent,  but  they  are  active.  There  are  two  kinds  of  supporters,  those  who 
vote  for  you  and  those  who  not  only  vote  but  work  for  you;  and  while  we 
are  grateful  to  those  who  give  their  yotes,  we  are  still  more  grateful  to  those 
who,  not  satisfied  with  simply  voting,  go  out  as  missionaries  to  bring  others 
into  line. 

I  am  sure  that  we  can  have  no  more  effective  assistance  in  this  campaign 
than  that  of  the  traveling  men.  They  travel  over  this  country  apd  they  do  not 
cost  campaign  committees  anything  for  expenses  or  literature.  And  they  can 
talk  faster,  longer,  and  louder  than  all  the  other  people  combined.  I  say  I 
am  glad  to  have  them  on  our  side  and  I  am  not  going  to  say  that  the  traveling 
men  are  entirely  unselfish  in  supporting  bimetallism.  In  fact,  I  am  one  of 
those  who  believe  that  it  is  much  easier  for  a  man  to  be  patriotic  when  he  can 
at  the  same  time  help  his  own  interests  and  the  interests  of  his  family  and 
the  interests  of  those  about  him.  I  believe  that  men  have  a  right  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  public  questions  to  apply  those  questions  to  their  own  condition 
and  see  how  a  policy  proposed  will  affect  them  in  their  business.  These  travel- 
ing men  are  right  when  they  determine  that  the  only  way  to  help  the  business 
of  the  traveling  man  is  to  enable  the  people  to  buy  the  goods  which  traveling 
men  have  to  sell.  The  gold  standard  enables  a  few  people  to  buy  more  than 
they  would  be  able  to  buy  under  bimetallism,  but  it  makes  the  great  mass  of  the 
people  less  able  to  buy  than  they  would  be  under  bimetallism.  If  a  man  sells 
shoes  he  knows  that  it  is  a  great  deal  better  to  sell  shoes  to  the  millions  who  will 
be  able  to  wear  them  under  a  just  financial  policy  than  to  confine  his  sales  to 
the  few  hundreds  who  will  be  able  to  wear  them  under  a  gold  standard.  As 
it  is  with  shoes  so  it  is  with  clothing,  and  so  it  is  with  all  the  goods  wliich 
are  sold.  If  you  increase  the  power  of  the  people  to  consume,  you  increase  their 
power  to  buy,  and  when  you  do  so  you  lay  the  only  foundation  upon  which 


TO  CHICAGO  VIA   TENNESSEE.  533 

commerce  in  this  country  can  stand.  Destroy  the  power  of  the  masses  to  buy 
and  you  undermine  our  commercial  fabric  and  increase  the  number  of  failures 
and  the  number  of  traveUng  men  out  of  employment. 

I  thank  you,  my  friends,  for  this  opportunity  to  speak  to  you.  If  men  ask 
you  what  i6  to  i  means,  you  tell  them  it  means  that  every  one  travelinj  man 
is  going  to  get  sixteen  votes  for  us  this  fall. 

Here  I  was  the  guest  of  Mayor  Taggart,  at  the  Grand  Hotel. 

The  following  day  was  spent  in  a  trip  through  northern  Indiana. 
The  largest  meeting  was  held  in  Logansport,  shorter  stops  being  made 
at  Noblesville,  Tipton,  Kokomo,  Winnemac,  Hammond,  and  some 
other  places.  At  Logansport  there  were  two  meetings;  here  I  met 
Senator  Turpie,  who  devoted  himself  actively  to  the  campaign  in  his 
State,  Judge  James  McCabe,  the  Indiana  member  of  the  Resolutions 
Committee  at  the  Chicago  convention,  and  ex-Congressman  Lafe 
Pence,  formerly  of  Colorado,  now  of  New  York.  The  visit  to  Logans- 
port was  a  very  enjoyable  one.  The  day's  work  closed  with  an  im- 
mense open  air  meeting  at  Hammond,  and  from  this  point  we  went 
to  Chicago,  reaching  there  in  time  for  a  night  train  West. 


CHAPTER  XLII. 


A  TRIP  THROUGH  THE   NORTHWEST. 

A  WAGNER  car,  the  "Idler" — a  most  inappropriate  name,  it 
seemed  to  me — was  provided  by  the  National  Committee,  and 
from  this  time  until  the  end  of  the  campaign  the  journey  was 
robbed  of  the  inconvenience  which  necessarily  attends  a  frequent 
change  of  cars.  There  was  sufficient  room  in  the  car  for  the  news- 
paper correspondents,  as  well  as  the  representatives  of  the  committee 
who  traveled  with  us;  our  meals  were  served  in  the  car,  and  we  were 
able  to  get  more  rest  than  was  possible  at  hotels. 

We  reached  Bulington,  Iowa,  on  the  morning  of  the  8th.  After 
breakfast  at  the  home  of  ex-Congressman  Seerley,  where  I  met  my 
former  pastor.  Dr.  Sutherland,  and  a  parade  through  the  principal 
streets,  we  were  driven  to  the  Exposition  grounds,  where  the  main 
speech  was  delivered  in  a  hall,  and  two  or  three  short  ones  at  overflow 
meetings.  I  was  here  interrupted  at  a  most  opportune  time.  I  was 
intending  to  quote  from  Mr.  McKinley's  speeches  in  favor  of  free 
silver,  and  had  the  quotations  marked  and  on  the  table  in  front  of  me. 
Just  as  I  reached  that  point  in  the  speech  some  enthusiastic  Re- 
publican in  the  audience  shouted  out,  "Hurrah  for  McKinley."  By 
asking  him  which  McKinley  he  referred  to,  and  contrasting  Mr.  Mc- 
Kinley's language  of  189 1  and  1893  with  his  language  of  1896,  I  was 
able  to  emphasize  the  change  which  had  taken  place. 

From  Burlington  we  went  to  Cedar  Rapids,  where  a  large  meeting 
was  held  in  Athletic  Park;  thence  to  Marshalltown,  where  two  meet- 
ings were  held,  the  last  under  the  auspices  of  the  silver  clubs  of  Iowa. 
Morning  found  us  at  Sioux  City,  where  a  speaker's  stand  had  been 
erected  in  the  commodious  depot.  Judge  A.  Van  Wagenen,  fusion 
candidate  for  Congress  in  that  district,  presided.  Hon.  C.  A.  Walsh, 
of  the  National  Committee,  and  Chairman  Curry,  of  the  State  commit- 
tee, were  in  charge  during  the  trip  through  Iowa;  ex-Congressman 
Hamilton  was  with  us  a  part  of  the  time. 

At  Sioux  City  we  turned  north,  and  after  several  brief  stops,  reached 
Sioux  Falls,  South  Dakota,  about  noon.  The  meeting  at  this  place 
rvas  a  ver}'  enthusiastic  one.     Senator  R.  F.  Pettigrew  was  chairman 

534 


A  TRIP  THROUGH  THE  NORTHWEST.  535 

of  the  Reception  Committee,  and  our  carriage  was  drawn  through  the 
streets  by  several  hundred  persons.  This  was  the  only  place  where 
this  was  done.  In  a  brief  speech  I  defended  Senator  Pettigrew's  action 
in  joining  the  silver  forces. 

From  Sioux  Falls  we  went  to  Huron,  stopping  at  a  few  points  en 
route. 

The  hour  was  late  and  the  weather  disagreeable,  but  the  people 
at  the  latter  place  seemed  willing  to  endure  the  inconvenience. 

The  next  stop  was  at  Aberdeen,  which  was  indelibly  impressed 
upon  my  memory  as  the  place  where  I  made  three  speeches  to  three 
large  audiences,  between  the  hours  of  half  past  one  and  half  past  two 
A.  M.  The  first  meeting  was  held  in  Exposition  Hall,  where  the  audi- 
ence had  assembled  at  seven  o'clock.  Senator  Peff er,  of  Kansas,  Senator 
Kyle,  of  South  Dakota,  and  others  had  spoken  during  the  six  hours 
which  elapsed  between  the  opening  of  the  meeting  and  the  arrival  of 
our  train.  The  fact  that  Senator  Pettigrew,  Republican,  and  Senator 
Kyle,  Populist — with  both  of  whom  my  relations  were  very  pleasant  in 
Washington — were  supporting  a  Democrat  for  the  Presidency,  was 
here  referred  to  as  showing  the  union  of  the  silver  forces  during  the 
campaign. 

There  was  no  switch  between  the  road  over  which  we  entered  Aber- 
deen and  the  road  over  which  we  went  to  Fargo,  and,  therefore, 
Mr.  Tomlinson  took  the  "Idler"  to  St.  Paul,  while  we  continued  our 
journey  toward  the  North. 

Late  as  it  was  when  we  retired,  we  were  up  at  Waupeton,  reaching 
Fargo  for  breakfast.  Here  Hon.  Henry  F.  Miller,  a  free  silver  Re- 
publican  national  banker,  presided  at  a  large  outdoor  meeting. 

The  Minnesota  committee,  consisting  of  National  Committeeman 
Thomas  D.  O'Brien  and  Chairman  Rosing,  of  the  Democratic  State 
Committee,  Hon.  S.  B.  Howard,  silver  Republican,  and  others,  met  us 
here  and  took  us  to  St.  Paul  by  special  train.  Messrs.  O'Brien  and 
Rosing  and  Congressman  Towne  deserve  special  credit  for  the  ex- 
cellent arrangements  made  for  the  Minnesota  tour. 

The  towns  through  which  we  passed  on  this  day  were,  for  the 
most  part,  small,  and  the  stops  were  brief. 

Three  meetings  were  addressed  in  St.  Paul  that  evening,  and  all 
were  largely  attended.  I  quote  from  the  speech  delivered  at  the  first 
meeting,  held  in  the  Auditorium: 


536  A   TRIP  THROUGH  THE  NORTHWEST, 

SU  Paul  Speech* 

Before  addressing  myself  to  the  subject  in  hand,  I  desire  to  express  to 
organized  labor  my  grateful  appreciation  of  the  gift  just  presented.  It  is  a 
gold  pen  with  a  silver  holder,  and  if  I  am  elected  by  my  countrymen  to  be  chiel 
executive  of  this  nation,  that  pen  and  holder  will  be  used  to  sign  a  free  coin> 
age  bill.  I  am  glad  that  the  pen  with  which  my  signature  is  to  be  affixed  is 
the  gift  of  the  laboring  men,  because  I  believe  that  the  laboring  men  of  this 
country — aye,  more  than  that,  the  laboring  men  of  all  the  world — are  inter- 
ested in  the  restoration  of  silver  to  its  ancient  place  by  the  side  of  gold. 

I  would  not  favor  the  free  coinage  of  silver  did  I  not  believe  that  it  would 
be  beneficial  to  those  who  toil,  because  my  political  philosophy  teaches  me  that 
there  can  be  no  prosperity  in  this  nation  unless  that  prosperity  begins  first 
among  those  who  create  wealth  and  finds  its  way  afterward  to  the  other 
classes  of  society.  More  than  that,  civilization  itself  rests  upon  the  great 
mass  of  the  people,  and  it  is  only  by  carrying  the  people  upward  and  onward 
that  we  can  expect  any  advance  in  civilization.  There  can  be  no  real  civiliza- 
tion where  a  few  have  more  than  they  can  use  and  the  many  have  not  suffi- 
cient to  give  necessary  sustenance.  Nor  do  I  believe  that  these  great  inequali- 
ties can  exist  in  a  nation  where  the  government  observes  the  old  maxim  of 
equal  rights  to  all  and  special  privileges  to  none. 

When  government  is  properly  administered,  there  will  be  no  railroad  wreck- 
ers to  make  themselves  rich  by  bankrupting  those  who  put  their  confidence  in 
them;  when  government  is  properly  administered  there  will  be  no  representa- 
tive of  a  coal  trust  sitting  by  every  fireside  to  exact  tribute  from  those  who 
desire  to  be  protected  from  the  cold  of  winter;  when  government  is  properly 
administered  there  will  be  no  syndicates  fattening  upon  the  government's  ad- 
versities, after  they  have  brought  the  adversities  upon  the  government;  when 
government  is  properly  administered  there  will  be  no  corporations  which  will 
assume  to  be  greater  than  the  power  which  created  them;  when  government  is 
properly  administered  it  will  recognize  those  fundamental  principles  set  forth 
in  the  Declaration  of  Independence:  that  all  men  are  created  equal,  that  they 
are  endowed  with  inalienable  rights,  that  governments  are  instituted  to  pre- 
serve these  rights,  and  that  governments  derive  their  just  powers  from  the 
consent  of  the  governed.  When  these  four  principles  are  applied,  then  govern- 
ment will  be  what  it  ought  to  be. 

Jackson  has  well  said  that  there  are  no  necessary  evils  in  government;  that 
evils  exist  only  in  its  abuses.  It  is  not  government  against  which  we  raise  our 
hands.  It  is  against  the  abuses  of  government  that  we  aim,  and  we  will  not 
be  driven  from  our  purpose  to  eradicate  these  evils,  although  every  man  en- 
trenched behind  a  special  privilege  heaps  abuse  upon  us. 

Speaking  of  the  desertion  of  the  gold  Democrats,  I  said : 

I  am  not  going  to  say  one  word  to  prevent  any  Democrat  doing  what  his 
conscience  tells  him  to  be  right,  but  if  .any  Democrat  is  going  to  leave  the 
Democratic  party,  I  want  him  to  find  his  reason  in  his  head  or  in  his  heart, 
and  not  in  his  pocketbook.  If  he  finds  his  reason  in  his  pbcketbook,  I  want 
him  to  be  man  enough  to  say  that  that  is  where  the  reason  is,  and  not  say 
that  he  leaves  because  all  the  rest  of  the  Democrats  have  become  anarchists. 


A   TRIP  THROUGH  THE  NORTHWEST.  537 

If  a  Democrat  is  connected  with  a  trust  and  loves  the  trust  more  than  he  does 
his  country,  let  him  say  so,  and  we  will  bid  him  Godspeed.  If  there  is  any 
Democrat  who  is  connected  with  a  corporation  and  prefers  to  retain  his  connec- 
tion with  that  corporation  rather  than  to  stand  with  the  Democratic  party  in 
its  effort  to  bring  the  Government  back  to  the  position  of  Jefferson  and  Jack- 
son, let  him  say  so. 

And  more  than  that,  let  not  the  Democrats  who  go  delude  themselves  with 
the  thought  that  this  is  but  a  temporary  disagreement.  Let  them  not  delude 
themselves  with  the  thought  that  they  can  separate  from  us  now  and  come  back 
hereafter  to  assume  positions  of  command.  Let  them  understand  what  this  con- 
test means.  This  contest  is  not  for  now  or  for  a  day.  This  contest  is  the 
beginning  of  a  struggle  which  will  not  end  until  this  Government  is  wrested 
from  the  hands  of  syndicates  and  trusts,  and  put  back  into  the  hands  of  the 
people.  Any  Democratic  son  who  desires  to  leave  his  father's  house  can  do 
so,  but  let  him  understand  that  when  he  gets  tired  and  comes  back  we  may  not 
kill  the  fatted  calf  for  him.  When  he  gets  tired  of  associating  with  those  who 
would  undo  what  Jefferson  and  Jackson  did,  it  may  be  that  those  whom  he  left 
at  home  will  make  him  saw  wood  a  long  while  before  he  gets  to  the  dinner 
table. 

At  this  meeting  a  committee  representing  organized  labor  presented 
me  a  gold  pen,  with  silver  holder,  with  the  instructions  to  use  them  in 
signing  the  silver  bill,  if  elected. 

At  Minneapolis  the  laboring  men  gave  me  a  beautiful  inkstand,  the 
bottom  and  top  being  each  a  silver  dollar,  and  the  stand  so  constructed 
as  to  give  the  appearance  of  sixteen  silver  dollars  piled  one  upon 
another.     It  was  opened  by  means  of  a  gold  dollar,  fastened  to  the  lid. 

At  Duluth  the  laboring  men  supplied  an  ink  bottle  made  of  gold 
and  silver  combined. 

At  Terre  Haute  the  laboring  men  added  a  blotting  pad  and  silver 
holder,  and  Miss  Broady,  daughter  of  the  fusion  candidate  for 
Congress  in  the  Lincoln  (Neb.)  district,  to  complete  the  outfit,  made 
a  pen  wiper,  in  appearance  like  the  daisy. 

Although  I  am  unable  to  use  these  articles  for  the  purpose  intended, 
they  are  preserved  as  a  souvenir  of  the  campaign,  interesting  enough, 
I  think  t^  justify  me  in  giving  a  cut  of  them  on  another  page. 

Mrs.  Bryan  joined  me  here  on  Sunday  morning,  and  we  attended 
the  Central  Presbyterian  Church  together. 

On  Monday  we  dined  with  Judge  Caldwell,  of  the  United  States 
Court,  and  Judges  Willis,  Egan  and  Kelly,  and  a  few  others  at  the 
Ryan  Hotel.  Judge  Caldwell  was  one  of  the  most  prominent  of  the 
silver  Republicans,  and  gave  to  our  cause  as  active  a  support  as  his 
position  would  permit. 


CHAPTER  XLIII. 


AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

FOUR  meetings  were  held  in  Minneapolis  on  Monday  night,  the 
first  one  at  the  Exposition  Building,  the  hall  in  which  the  Re- 
publican National  Convention  was  held  in  1892.     Below  will 
be  found  a  portion  of  the  speech  delivered  on  this  occasion; 

Minneapolis  Speech — Exposition  Building. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  Before  entering  upon  the  discus- 
sion of  any  political  question,  I  desire  to  express  my  appreciation  of  the  kindly 
feeling  which  has  prompted  the  gift  presented  to  me  in  your  presence.  I  am 
the  more  gratified  because  of  the  source  from  which  it  comes.  When  I  was  in  St. 
Louis  a  few  weeks  ago,  the  horseshoers  presented  to  me  a  silver  horseshoe 
which  I  promised  to  hang  over  the  doors  of  the  White  House,  if  I  am  elected. 
Over  in  St.  Paul  last  Saturday  night  the  laboring  men  gave  me  a  pen  with  a 
silver  holder  with  the  instruction  that  I  should  use  them  in  signing  the  free 
coinage  bill  which  will  come  to  me  if  I  am  elected.  And  tonight  the  laboring 
men  of  this  city  have  been  thoughtful  enough  to  provide  me  with  this  beautiful 
inkstand,  which  is  a  part  of  the  necessary  outfit.  Now  that  I  have  a  pen,  pen- 
holder and  inkstand,  I  only  need  the  ink  to  be  properly  equipped  for  the  woik. 

As  I  remarked  to  the  laboring  men  of  St.  Paul,  I  would  not  favor  the  free 
coinage  of  silver  did  I  not  believe  that  it  would  be  for  the  best  interests  of 
those  who  toil.  I  have  not  belonged  to  that  class  known  distinctively  as  work- 
ingmen,  being  a  lawyer  by  profession,  but  I  have  been  taught  that  the  legal  pro- 
fession must  have  something  to  rest  upon.  Lawyers  do  not  produce  wealth, 
and  unless  wealth  is  first  produced  they  will  suffer.  I  believe  that  all  the  classes 
which  rest  upon  the  producers  of  wealth  can  only  prosper  permanently  when 
the  producers  of  wealth  are  prosperous,  and,  therefore,  I  am  not  unselfish  when 
I  desire  such  legislation  as  will  enable  the  people  to  have  more  than  enough  to 
eat  and  drink  and  wear.  I  want  them  to  have  enough  to  be  comfortable, 
because  until  they  produce  there  is  nothing  to  distribute,  and  if  they  simply 
produce  without  enjoying,  the  production  of  wealth  will  be  so  discot4raged  that 
production  will  finally  cease. 

I  desire  to  say  also  before  proceeding  further  that  I  appreciate  the  honor 
which  has  been  done  me  tonight  by  these  veterans  of  the  war  who  have  marched 
as  a  body  guard.  I  would  not  receive  the  support  of  these  soldiers  if  I  thought 
their  interests  could  not  be  intrusted  to  those  who  believe  in  an  American  finan- 
cial policy.  I  am  confident  that  the  interest  of  those  who  fought  thirty  years 
ago  that  this  Union  might  be  one  will  be  safe  in  the  hands  of  those  who  are 
fighting  today  a  great  battle  which  will  determine  whether  this  nation,  being 
one,  is  big  enough  to  attend  to  its  own  business.     I  am  informed  that  the  Re- 

538 


AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH.  539 

publicans  have  been  circulating  in  this  city  an  editorial  which  was  once  pub- 
lished in  the  Omaha  World- Herald.  I  was  editor  of  the  Omaha  World-Herald 
for  nearly  two  years,  but  my  editorial  work  began  about  two  years  after  the 
publication  of  the  editorial  to  which  I  refer.  That  editorial  criticised  pension 
legislation,  but  those  who  are  circulating  it  know  that  it  was  published  before  I 
was  at  all  connected  with  the  paper,  and  that  I  was  in  no  way  responsible  for  it. 
If  they  have  not  known  it  heretofore,  they  know  it  now,  and  will  not  be  free 
from  criticism  if  they  use  it  hereafter.  The  fact  that  they  attempt  to  use  an 
editorial  which  I  did  not  write  is  proof  that  they  have  not  found  anything  in 
;ny  four  years  of  Congressional  life  which  they  can  use. 

Let  me  call  your  attention  to  another  matter.  In  my  travels  over  the  coun- 
try I  have  received  letters  asking  me  to  answer  all  kinds  of  questions.  I  do 
not  always  pay  attention  to  these  requests  because  I  desire  to  make  my  own 
speech  instead  of  having  it  outlined  for  me  by  men  who  do  not  have  as  much 
interest  in  our  cause  as  I  have,  but  I  have  received  a  letter  today  from  so  dis- 
tinguished a  citizen  of  Minneapolis  that  I  think  I  am  justified  in  making  some 
reference  to  it.  The  letter  is  dated  October  12  and  signed  by  W.  D.  Washburn, 
who  is,  I  believe,  an  ex-Senator  from  this  State.  In  this  letter  he  asks  me 
many  questions  about  my  votes  and  speeches  in  the  House  of  Representatives 
on  the  tariff  bill.  I  answer  these  questions  by  respectfully  referring  him  to  the 
Congressional  Record,  but  when  he  asks  me  to  enter  into  a  discussion  of  the 
tariff  question  I  reply  to  him  that  there  is  a  question  before  the  American  peo- 
ple of  far  greater  importance.  The  tariff  question  can  be  settled  at  any  time, 
but  there  is  one  question  which  must  be  settled  now.  If  he  wants  me  to  dis- 
cuss the  tariff,  I  reply  to  him  that  if  he  will  join  me  in  putting  a  prohibitory 
duty  on  foreign  financial  policies  I  will  then  discuss  the  rest  of  the  schedule 
with  him.  If  he  is  not  willing  to  discriminate  against  that  foreign  product  by 
a  prohibitory  duty,  then  I  suggest  that  he  wait  until  the  money  question  is  set- 
tled by  international  agreement  and  afterward  submit  the  tariff  question  to  inter- 
national agreement.  I  am  not  going  to  discuss  the  tariff  question,  because  I 
desire  to  call  your  attention  to  the  paramount  issue  of  this  campaign,  declared 
to  be  so  by  three  political  parties,  and  considered  so  even  by  the  Republicans, 
who  are  afraid  to  discuss  it  and  are  attempting  to  drag  in  the  tariff  question 
instead. 

But  there  is  a  part  of  the  letter  which  I  think  you  ought  to  hear.  It  is 
good,  and  I  am  not  willing  to  deny  you  any  good  thing.     He  says: 

The  audience  will  be  composed,  I  presume,  very  largely  of  laboring  men 
and  wage  earners,  all  of  a  high  order.  This  class  of  people,  like  others,  dominated 
by  human  selfishness  so  far  as  their  own  interests  are  concerned,  naturally  prefer  to 
receive  their  wages  in  dollars  worth  one  hundred  cents,  rather  than  in  those  worth 
only  fifty-three  cents. 

I  take  for  my  text  the  words  "like  others,  dominated  by  human  selfishness 
so  far  as  their  own  interests  are  concerned."  Laboring  men,  I  want  to  ask  you 
why  it  is  that  every  goldbug  says  you  are  selfish  and  that  your  vote  will  be 
influenced  by  selfish  considerations,  while  he  pretends  to  be  a  philanthropist 
and  insists  that  he  loves  honest  money  simply  because  it  will  help  other  people. 
I  want  to  know  why  it  is  that  these  goldbugs  are  so  sure  that  everybody  else 
will  be  influenced  by  selfish  considerations  and  so  positive  that  personal  inter- 

•61 


540  AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

ests  cannot  affect  them.  Why  is  it,  my  friends?  I  will  tell  you  why.  If  a 
man  believes  that  a  proposed  law  is  good  for  himself  and  also  good  for  others, 
he  will  admit  that  it  is  good  for  himself;  but  if  he  thinks  a  law  is  good  for  him- 
self and  Bad  for  otTiers,  he  will  not  admit  that  it  is  good  for  him.  Now,  that  is 
a  rule  which  you  can  examine  and  apply  in  everyday  life,  and  you  will  find  that 
men  never  deny  that  a  thing  is  good  for  them  so  long  as  they  can  show  that 
others  share  the  benefit.  It  is  only  when  they  believe  that  they  prosper  by  the 
adversity  of  others  that  you  find  them  denying  the  benefit  to  themselves. 

There  is  one  thing  that  I  like  about  the  advocates  of  free  coinage,  and  that 
is  that  they  do  not  pose  as  "holier  than  thou"  people.  Ask  a  silver  man  why 
he  wants  bimetallism,  and  he  says  that  he  wants  it  because  it  is  good  for  him 
and  he  believes  that  it  is  good  for  others  also.  He  knows  that  the  gold  stand- 
ard destroys  opportunity  for  work  and  increases  the  number  of  idle  men,  and 
he  knows  that  idle  men  are  a  menace  to  his  own  employment.  Ask  a  farmer 
why  he  wants  bimetallism  and  he  will  tell  you  that  he  believes  it  is  good  for 
him  and  for  others  also.  He  tells  you  that  he  suffers  from  falling  prices,  and 
that  he  believes  the  only  way  to  stop  falling  prices  is  to  increase  the  volume  of 
standard  money,  and  he  knows  that  that  can  only  be  done  by  restoring  silver 
to  its  ancient  position  by  the  side  of  gold.  Ask  a  business  man  why  he  wants 
bimetallism,  and  he  will  tell  you  that  he  believes  bimetallism  will  be  good  for 
him  and  for  others  also.  He  will  tell  you  that  he  makes  a  living  out  of  those 
to  whom  he  sells,  not  out  of  those  from  whom  he  borrows.  He  will  tell  you  that 
he  can  sell  more  goods  when  people  are  able  to  buy,  and  that,  therefore,  he 
believes  bimetallism  will  bring  prosperity.  But  ask  one  of  the  great  financiers 
why  he  is  in  favor  of  the  gold  standard.  Will  he  say  that  it  is  because  it  is 
good  for  him?  You  never  heard  one  of  them  say  that.  Some  of  them  even  say 
that  free  coinage  will  be  good  for  them  but  that  they  do  not  want  anything 
which  will  help  them.  They  pretend  to  want  the  gold  standard  because  it  will 
be  good  for  the  laboring  man.  Yes,  my  friends,  those  financiers  are  so  con- 
cerned about  those  who  toil,  that  whenever  one  of  them  is  troubled  with  sleep- 
lessness, his  physician  never  asks  him  the  cause  of  the  trouble  but  just  tells  him 
that  his  sleep  will  be  restored  if  he  will  quit  worrying  about  the  laboring  man. 
The  financier  says  that  he  is  in  favor  of  the  gold  standard  because  it  will  help 
the  farmer,  the  laborer,  and  the  business  man.  When  you  tell  him  that  the 
laboring  men,  the  farmers  and  the  business  men  are  willing  to  risk  bimetallism, 
he  rises  to  the  full  height  of  his  moral  stature  and  exclaims: 
But  shall  I  let  them  hurt  themselves? 
No,  he  will  cram  the  gold  standard  down  their  throats  whether  they  want 
it  or  not,  and  he  will  justify  his  conduct  on  the  ground  that  he  loves  them  bet- 
ter than  he  loves  himself.  Do  you  believe  it,  my  friends?  I  do  not.  I  say  that 
the  financier  is  just  as  good  as  anybody  else,  but  I  deny  that  he  is  better.  I 
am  willing  to  admit  that  he  is  as  unselfish  as  others,  but  I  deny  that  he  is  more 
unselfish.  I  challenge  you  to  find  in  six  thousand  years  of  recorded  history  a 
single  page  which  proves  that  the  owning  and  loaning  of  money  purges  man- 
kind from  the  dross  of  selfishness. 

Is  Mr.  Washburn,  "like  others,  dominated  by  human  selfishness?"  Are  all 
people  dominated  by  human  selfishness?  If  so,  does  it  not  explain  why  the 
heads  of  the  trusts  are  against  our  ticket?    But  why  don't  they  say  that  it  is 


AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH.  541 

because  they  are  dominated  by  human  selfishness  and  know  that  the  election 
of  the  Chicago  ticket  will  hurt  the  trusts?  Why  is  it  that  the  bond  syndicates 
are  against  us?  Is  it  because  they  are  dominated  by  human  selfishness?  Why 
don't  these  men  come  out  and  openly  declare  that  they  are  opposed  to  our 
platform  because  it  interferes  with  their  business  of  bleeding  the  government? 
But  no,  we  are  told  that  these  financiers  are  unselfish,  and  that  in  spite  of  all 
the  good  that  free  coinage  would  bring  to  them,  they  have  the  moral  courage 
to  turn  their  backs  upon  their  own  welfare  and  plead  for  the  welfare  of  the 
common  people. 

But  there  is  another  thing  which  I  wish  you  would  notice.  I  believe  Mr. 
Washburn  is  a  large  employer  of  labor.  Now  if  he  is  dominated  by  human 
selfishness,  why  is  he  worrying  so  much  about  the  possibility  of  having  to  pay 
his  employes  in  fifty-three  cent  dollars?  If  his  employes  are  to  be  paid  in  cheap 
dollars,  then  Mr.  Washburn  will  make  a  larger  profit  out  of  their  labor,  and  he 
ought  to  rejoice  over  it  if  he,  "like  others,  is  dominated  by  human  selfishness;" 
but  no,  he  desires  to  pose  before  his  employes  as  one  who  is  willing  to  deny 
himself  the  advantage  of  paying  in  cheap  dollars  in  order  that  the  employes 
may  not  lose  by  free  coinage.  What  reason  have  you  to  believe  that  he  is 
less  selfish  than  his  employes?  Now,  my  friends,  I  want  to  say  to  you  that 
you  cannot  suffer  if  you  are  his  employes,  because  any  man  who  is  interested 
enough  in  his  employes  to  warn  them  of  the  evil  effects  of  free  coinage  before 
the  election,  will  love  his  employes  well  enough  after  the  election  to  take  care 
of  them.  If  under  free  coinage  the  dollar  will  be  a  fifty-three  cent  dollar,  then 
Mr.  Washburn  can  get  nearly  twice  as  many  of  such  dollars  for  his  product,  and 
he  can,  therefore,  pay  wages  which  will  buy  as  much  as  the  wages  paid  today 
and  still  make  as  much  profit  as  he  does  now.  If  he  loves  you,  therefore,  he 
will  not  let  you  suffer,  and  if  he  does  not  love  you  well  enough  to  protect  you 
after  the  election,  then  you  have  reason  to  doubt  the  love  which  he  pretends 
before  the  election,  when  he  tries  to  make  you  vote  as  he  votes. 

We  are  in  favor  of  bimetallism,  and  we  support  our  claim  by  logic  which 
cannot  be  overcome,  and  our  opponents  prove  their  inability  to  meet  us  on 
this  question  when  they  attempt  to  turn  the  discussion  to  some  other  question. 
Mr.  Washburn  complains  of  the  Wilson  bill.  I  arrived  in  town  late  this  after- 
noon, and  was  handed  an  envelope  containing  an  extract  from  a  speech  which 
Mr.  Washburn  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  on  the  nth  day 
of  July,  1892.  I  have  not  had  an  opportunity  to  verify  this  speech  by  the  Con- 
gressional Record.  I  make  this  explanation  because  I  am  careful  not  to  do 
any  one  an  injustice,  and  when  I  read  this  I  will  ask  Mr.  Washburn,  if  he  is 
in  the  room,  to  say  whether  I  am  quoting  him  correctly.  (After  a  pause.)  He 
does  not  seem  to  be  here.  I  will  read  this,  and  if  when  I  am  gone  you  learn 
that  it  is  an  incorrect  quotation,  I  ask  you  to  give  it  no  further  consideration. 
In  this  extract  I  find  that  !\Ir.  Washburn  gives  the  price  of  wheat  beginning 
with  the  year  1865  and  continuing  to  1890,  and  in  speaking  of  the  price  he  uses 
these  words: 

The  hopes  of  the  producer  have  been  turned  to  ashes,  the  grain  dealer  and  miller 
and  the  business  men  have  been  disappointed.  The  balance  of  trade  In  favor  of  this 
country  that  everyone  loolced  to  with  so  much  assurance,  has  been  much  below  the 
general  estimate,  probably  due  to  the  depreciation  of  the  prices  in  agriculture  and  fruit 
exports    of    $200,000,000.    Gold    is    still    leaving    tlie    country,    and    there    is    but    little    left 


542  AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

to    support    general    business,    and    I    think    there    Is    a    general    disappointment    that 
with  the  tariff  ol  1890  we  do  not  see  better  times. 

If  this  quotation  is  correct,  then  Senator  Washburn  tells  you  that  there  was 
general  disappointment  that  the  tariff  of  1890  was  not  followed  by  better  times. 
And  again  he  says: 

The  people  of  the  country  were  startled,  I  certainly  was,  when  the  statement 
was  made  in  one  of  the  magazines  a  few  weeks  since,  that  one-halt  of  the  volumo 
of  wealth  of  this  country  is  owned  by  thirty-six  thousand  persons. 

And  still  again  he  says: 

The  millionaires,  and  the  tens  of  millionaires,  and  the  hundreds  of  millionaires  have 
never  created  nor  earned  their  wealth,  and  the  royal  road  to  wealth  has  been  through 
illegitimate  speculation,  stock  exchanges  and  grain  gambling,  railroad  wrecking  and  trusts, 
and  the  whole  volume  of  iniquities  that  have  developed  in  the  nefarious  methods  of  the 
stock  exchanges  of  this  country. 

Now  then,  my  friends,  this  Senator  has  expressed  his  alarm  over  the-  fact 
that  over  half  of  the  wealth  of  the  country  is  owned  by  only  thirty-six  thousand 
persons,  that  the  millionaires  have  neither  created  nor  earned  their  wealth, 
■  and  that  the  royal  road  to  wealth  has  been  through  illegitimate  speculations, 
stock  and  grain  gambling,  railroad  wrecking,  trusts,  etc.  Ought  the  Senator 
to  be  surprised  if  we  are  alarmed  now  at  the  same  thing  which  scared  him  four 
years  ago?  And  ought  he  not  to  be  alarmed  now  when  he  finds  that  nearly 
every  man  whom  he  described  there,  and  nearly  every  class  which  he  denounced 
there,  unite  in  supporting  of  the  same  ticket  which  he  is  supporting?  If  it  is 
alarming  that  thirty-six  thousand  people  own  half  the  wealth  of  the  country, 
is  it  not  also  alarming  that  these  same  people  are  uniting  to  control  legislation 
in  order  that  they  may  continue  to  dominate  the  politics  of  this  country? 
Is  it  not  alarming  that  all  the  great  trusts  of  this  country  have  gathered 
together  behind  the  bulwark  which  the  Republican  party  has  thrown  up,  and 
have  contributed  to  a  corruption  fund  which  has  no  parallel  in  the  political 
history  of  this  country?  Is  it  not  alarming  that  these  combinations  are 
seeking  to  control  the  election  in  order  that  they  may  get  back  out  of 
the  people  more  than  they  spent  in  trying  to  overcome  the  people? 

Now,  my  friends,  a  cause  is  known,  like  an  individual,  by  the  company 
it  keeps,  and  if  you  will  only  look  for  a  moment  at  the  company  it  is  keeping, 
you  will  get  a  good  idea  of  the  gold  standard."  Show  me  those  who  have 
preyed  upon  the  public,  show  me  those  who  have  used  the  instrumentalities 
of  government  for  private  gain,  and  I  will  show  you  the  men  who  think 
my  election  will  be  dangerous  to  this  country.  I  am  not  surprised  that  in 
Minnesota  and  elsewhere  Republicans  are  leaving  the  Republican  party 
when  they  find  that  it  is  drawing  to  it  all  those  Democrats  whom  the 
Republicans  in  the  past  have  been  in  the  habit  of  denouncing.  I  am  glad 
that  we  have  the  support  of  these  Republicans.  I  am  glad  that,  when  some  of 
our  political  leaders  are  deserting  us,  so  many  Republicans  are  coming  forward 
to  fill  up  the  ranks  and  carry  on  this  fight.  The  Repttblican  who  is  near  by 
in  such  a  fight  as  this  is  better  than  the  Democrat  who  is  afar  off. 

The  Republicans  who  are  joining  with  us  in  this  campaign  have  the  con- 
solation of  knowing  that  in  doing  so  they  are  not  compelled  to  abandon  the 
convictions  which  they  have  followed  in  times  past.  There  is  a  wide  differ- 
ence between  the  Republicans  who  come  to  us  and  the  Democrats  who  go 


AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH.  543 

from  us.  The  Democrats  who  go  from  us  must  fall  upon  their  knees  and  beg 
pardon  to  Senator  Sherman  for  all  the  bad  words  the  Democratic  party  has 
spoken  against  him,  while  the  Republicans  who  come  to  us  can  come  bringing 
in  their  hands  the  Republican  platform  which  was  adopted  in  this  very  hall 
four  years  ago.  That  platform  said,  "The  American  people,  from  tradition  and 
interest,  favor  bimetallism."  Do  traditions  change  in  four  years?  No,  my 
friends,  you  cannot  change  traditions  in  so  short  a  time,  neither  can  you  forget 
them.  Do  the  interests  of  the  people  change  in  four  years?  No,  their  interests 
are  the  same  now  that  they  were  four  years  ago,  and  if  the  Republican  party 
declared  four  years  ago  that  the  American  people,  from  tradition  and  interest, 
favor  bimetallism,  the  Republican  bimetallists  have  a  right  to  stand  on  the 
same  declaration  today  even  though  the  Republican  party  may  retreat  from  its 
position  and  go  across  the  ocean  to  find  its  inspiration. 

There  is  an  important  difference  between  those  who  espouse  the  cause  of 
bimetallism  and  those  who  desert  bimetallism.  The  man  who  comes  to  us 
is  always  willing  to  rise  before  any  audience  and  describe  the  road  by  which  he 
came  and  the  arguments  which  converted  him,  but  the  Democrat  who  goes 
from  us  never  states  the  real  cause  which  dragged  him  out  of  the  Democratic 
party.  I  think  it  was  Senator  Morgan  who  stated  that  there  are  two  kinds  of 
conversion.  He  mentioned  Saul  of  Tarsus  as  illustrating  one  kind.  Saul  at 
first  persecuted  the  Christians  and  afterward  became  a  preacher  of  the  Christian 
faith.  Aaron  was  cited  as  an  illustration  of  the  second  kind  of  conversion.  He 
started  out  a  worshiper  of  the  true  God  and  afterward  set  up  a  golden  calf. 
Now,  if  you  will  remember,  Saul,  when  he  became  Paul  the  apostle,  gloried  in 
relating  his  experience.  He  told  how  he  was  stricken  with  blindness,  and  how 
at  last  the  scales  fell  from  his  eyes  and  he  saw,  but  Aaron  always  was  ashamed 
of  that  calf  business.  And  so,  my  friends,  with  those  who  come  to  us  they 
have  nothing  to  conceal;  they  are  perfectly  willing  to  tell  where  they  stand  and 
why  they  stand  there;  they  are  among  the  most  zealous  of  our  recruits.  I  used 
to  think  it  might  be  well  to  have  a  mourners'  bench  for  those  who  were  coming 
to  us,  but  they  do  not  come  mourning;  they  come  rejoicing.  They  are  not 
sorry  at  all,  they  are  happy.  They  come  with  the  enthusiasm  of  missionaries 
who  go  forth  to  preach  the  gospel  to  others,  while  those  who  go  from  us  are 
only  able  to  say  in  explanation  of  their  conduct  that  if  we  had  the  free  coinage 
of  silver,  it  would  be  awful.  Some  of  them  are  so  under  the  control  of  the 
financiers  that  we  have  reason  to  doubt  whether  their  change  is  found  in  the 
head  or  is  merely  a  device  for  extending  their  notes  at  the  bank. 

There  are  reasons  for  bimetallism,  and  those  reasons  are  so  plain  and  sim- 
ple that  they  can  be  easily  understood,  and  when  we  preach  bimetallism  we  are 
able  to  give  a  reason  for  our  faith. 

We  are  told  that  all  we  need  is  confidence.  This  confidence  idea,  my 
friends,  is  not  a  new  one;  it  is  at  least  eighteen  hundred  years  old.  I  find  in  the 
Bible  a  rebuke  of  the  same  kind  of  confidence  which  is  being  preached  today. 
I  read  there  these  words,  "If  a  brother  or  sister  be  naked  or  destitute  and  one 
of  you  say  unto  them,  depart  in  peace,  be  ye  warmed  and  fed,  notwithstanding 
you  give  them  not  those  things  which  are  needful  to  the  body,  what  does  it 
profit?"  If  you  tell  our  opponents  that  laborers,  who  are  idle  in  the  streets 
because  the  gold  standard  has  made  it  more  profitable  to  hoard  money  than 


544  AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

to  employ  labor  in  the  development  of  the  resources  of  the  country,  are  naked 
and  hungry,  their  only  answer  is,  "Be  ye  clothed  and  fed;"  but  they  give  thtm 
nothing  to  eat  or  to  wear.  Tell  these  financiers  that  the  farmer  has  found 
his  prices  falling  when  he  sold  his  products,  without  his  taxes,  debts  and 
fixed  charges  falling;  tell  them  that  the  farmer  has  reached  a  point  where  the 
income  from  his  farm  is  not  more  than  sufficient  to  pay  his  debts,  his  taxes  and 
his  fixed  charges;  tell  them  that  falling  prices  have  about  extinguished  the 
farmer's  living  expenses,  and  that  he  is  needing  food  and  clothing,  and  they  say 
to  the  farmer,  "Be  ye  clothed  and  fed"  without  giving  him  anything  to  eat  or 
wear.  They  are  preaching  the  same  doctrine  that  was  rebuked  eighteen  hundred 
years  ago,  and  it  should  be  rebuked  now.  It  is  a  confidence  game,  my  friends. 
If  you  ask  them  to  have  confidence  in  you,  you  will  find  that  confidence  is  very 
one  sided  in  this  game.  If  you  say  to  the  men  who  have  accumulated  their 
money  among  you,  "Can't  you  trust  us  to  make  laws?  Can't  you  trust  those 
who  produce  wealth  to  have  a  voice  in  the  Government?"  and  some  of  them  will 
reply  to  you  that  the  people  are  a  rabble,  and  that  they  doubt  their  capacity  to 
make  laws.  If  you  have  a  farm  which  is  worth  half  what  it  used  to  be  and  try 
to  borrow  on  it,  the  banker  will  tell  you  that  it  is  not  worth  as  much  as  it  used 
to  be;  and  if  you  ask  him  to  have  confidence  that  the  price  will  go  up,  what 
will  he  say?  He  will  reply,  "Wait  until  the  price  goes  up  and  then  I  will 
have  confidence."  If  you  ask  the  financier  to  loan  you  money  on  the  prospect 
of  better  times,  he  will  tell  you  to  wait  until  the  good  times  come.  He  will 
compel  you  to  wait  until  you  have  some  security.  They  are  asserting  that  the 
restoration  of  confidence  is  the  only  belief  that  can  come  to  this  country,  while 
we  are  trying  to  secure  a  foundation  for  confidence  to  rest  upon. 

When  money  goes  up,  property  goes  down.  A  dollar  cannot  buy  more 
unless  property  sells  for  less.  You  can  make  a  dollar  buy  as  much  as  you  like. 
If  the  dollar  does  not  buy  enough  now,  you  can  make  it  buy  more.  A  dollar  is 
a  creature  of  law.  When  we  talk  about  legislation  in  regard  to  money,  cur 
opponents  tell  us  that  commerce  regulates  money.  I  ask  them  why  they  did 
not  trust  commerce  to  demonetize  silver  in  1873?  Why  was  it  that  they  invoked 
the  law  to  strike  silver  down  at  that  time?  We  have  as  much  right  to  invoke 
the  law  to  restore  silver  as  they  had  to  degrade  it.  The  silver  dollar  was  worth 
three  cents  more  than  the  gold  dollar  in  1873,  and  if  you  ask  our  opponents  why 
they  demonetized  silver,  they  will  probably  tell  you  that  it  was  because  silver 
was  worth  too  much,  and  if  you  ask  them  why  they  do  not  remonetize  it,,  they 
will  tell  you  that  it  is  not  now  worth  enough.  They  will  tell  you  that  they 
demonetized  silver  because  it  was  going  abroad,  and  they  refuse  to  remonetize 
it  for  fear  it  will  come  back  again.  The  opponents  of  silver  have  invoked  the 
law  at  every  opportunity,  but  they  always  dispute  the  efficacy  of  law  when  we 
desire  to  legislate.  They  invoked  the  law  in  1893  when  they  wanted  to  repeal 
the  purchasing  clause  of  the  Sherman  law,  and  what  reason  did  they  give? 
They  said  that  the  purchase  of  silver  was  making  gold  go  abroad,  and  yet,  after 
they  repealed  the  Sherman  law,  gold  went  abroad  faster  than  it  did  before. 
When  gold  went  abroad  before  1893  we  were  issuing  paper  money  in  its  place, 
but  when  they  repealed  the  law  and  stopped  the  issue  of  money,  gold  still  went 
abroad  and  we  had  nothing  to  take  its  place.  According  to  the  Treasury  report 
we  have  $150,000,000  less   in   actual   circulation   than   we  had  two  years   ago. 


AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH.  545 

whereas  we  ought  to  have  an  increase.  Notwithstanding  this  actual  decrease 
in  the  circulation  within  two  years,  the  Republican  party  is  offering  no  plan 
to  stop  the  decrease.  In  1890,  when  Senator  Sherman  spoke  in  favor  of  the 
Sherman  law,  he  gave  for  the  reason  of  its  adoption  that  it  added  to  the  cur- 
rency something  like  $54,000,000  a  year,  and  he  submitted  an  argument  to  prove 
that  the  country  needed  that  amount  of  new  money  every  year.  If  we  need 
$50,000,000  of  new  money  each  year  to  keep  pace  with  population  and  industry, 
and  instead  of  having  $50,000,000  a  year  for  the  last  two  years,  hive  had  a 
deficiency  of  $150,000,000,  then  we  now  have  $250,000,000  of  money  less  in  cir- 
culation than  we  should  have  according  to  Senator  Sherman's  estimate.  But 
Mr.  Sherman  does  not  stand  alone.  Other  Republicans  have  made  the  same 
argument  in  favor  of  an  increase  of  the  currency.  Read  for  instance  the  speech 
made  in  the  House  of  Representatives  by  the  Republican  candidate  for  the  presi- 
dency in  defense  of  that  same  Sherman  bill.  He  stated  in  that  speech  that  we 
need  more  money.  The  Bland  act  was  then  furnishing  about  $24,000,000  a 
year  of  new  money,  but  Mr.  McKinley  said  we  needed  more  than  that,  and 
voted  to  increase  the  amount  to  $54,000,000  per  year,  and  yet  at  this  time  when, 
instead  of  having  $24,000,000  a  year  increase,  we  have  a  decrease  of  $75,000,000 
a  year,  he  says  that  we  do  not  need  more  money  but  only  need  to  put  the  money 
we  now  have  at  work.  Why  should  money  go  to  work  when  it  is  more  valu- 
able in  a  vault  than  when  invested  in  enterprise?  We  are  told  that  we  should 
open  the  mills  instead  of  the  mints.  My  friends,  your  mills  could  be  opened 
now  if  the  people  were  able  to  buy  what  the  mills  produce.  What  is  the  use 
of  opening  mills  when  the  people  are  not  able  to  buy  the  output?  If  you  can- 
not dispose  of  what  you  produce,  you  have  simply  to  follow  the  opening  process 
with  the  closing  process.  You  have  here  a  great  city  and  adjoining  you  another 
great  city — the  twin  cities  of  the  northwest.  These  cities  rest  upon  your  broad 
and  fertile  plains.  If  you  make  it  impossible  for  the  farmer  to  buy,  I  ask  you 
how  are  the  merchants  of  Minneapolis  and  St.  Paul  going  to  sell?  If  you 
destroy  the  value  of  farm  products,  you  lessen  the  amount  of  money  brought 
into  this  country  by  exports,  and  when  you  lessen  the  amount  of  money  derived 
from  the  sale  of  these  products,  you  lessen  the  amount  of  money  which  the 
farmers  have  to  expend  in  the  purchasing  of  the  things  which  you  have  for 
sale.  Are  St.  Paul  and  Minneapolis  going  to  be  made  prosperous  by  making 
the  foreign  financier  prosperous?  It  is  your  farmers  who  are  going  to  buy  the 
things  which  you  produce,  and  we  had  better  take  care  of  them  instead  of  mak- 
ing legislation  to  suit  the  financier.  We  are  told  that  this  is  a  business  question. 
In  one  sense  it  is,  and  if  the  gold  standard  advocate  will  use  his  ballot  to 
advance  his  interests,  why  should  not  the  producers  of  wealth  in  all  the  States 
use  their  ballots  to  protect  themselves  from  the  invasion  of  this  foreign  policy? 
If  I  were  to  tell  one  of  you  that  your  house  was  on  fire,  that  your  family  was  in 
danger,  would  you  be  unconcerned?  Suppose  I  told  you  that  only  one-half  of 
your  house  was  to  be  burned,  would  you  say  "If  it  is  only  half,  I  do  not  care 
about  that."  No,  if  anybody  attempted  to  burn  any  part  of  your  house  you 
would  resent  it  as  a  personal  injury;  the  gold  standard  has  for  its  ultimate 
object  the  destruction  of  a  large  part  of  the  value  of  your  house  and  of  your 
land,  and  a  large  part  of  the  value  of  your  farms  and  factories;  can  you  remain 
indifferent  while  this  policy  is  marching  toward  you?     Instead  of  sitting  still. 


546  AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

do  you  invite  it  to  come?  Instead  of  being  inactive  do  you  help  to  fasten  it  upon 
yourselves  and  upon  your  children?  That  is  what  the  Republican  party  asks 
you  to  do.  The  Republican  party  tells  you  that  the  gold  standard  must  be 
maintained  until  the  leading  commercial  nations  will  join  you  in  abandoning  it 
I  can  appeal  to  Democrats  as  the  regular  nominee  of  the  Democratic  parly; 
I  can  appeal  to  Populists  as  the  regular  nominee  of  that  party;  I  can  appeal 
to  the  Silver  Republicans  as  the  regular  nominee  of  the  Silver  party;  but  I  can 
appeal  to  you  all  on  a  higher  ground  than  mere  party  regularity;  I  can  urge 
a  higher  claim  than  mere  party  regularity  can  give — I  am  the  only  presidentir.l 
candidate  prominently  before  the  people  who  believes  that  the  American  people 
are  able  to  attend  to  their  own  financial  business.  Do  you  say  that  we  must 
wait  for  foreign  help?  I  reply  that  we  have  waited  for  twenty  years.  We  have 
sent  three  commissions  abroad  and  they  have  come  back  to  us  empty  handed. 
Three  national  parties  have  now  declared  that  the  time  for  waiting  has  past. 
Three  parties  have  declared  that  we  shall  wait  no  longer,  and  that  the  people 
of  the  United  States,  rising  in  their  strength,  shall  declare  for  the  free  and 
unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and  silver  at  the  present  legal  ratio  of  i6  to  i  without 
waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  or  any  other  nation.  You  ask,  "Can  we  do  it?" 
Upon  that  question  we  are  ready  to  meet  the  opposition.  We  are  ready  to 
state  our  reasons.  There  is  only  one  way  to  find  out  and  that  way  is  by  trying; 
our  opponents  will  never  find  out  by  waiting.  If  you  tell  me  that  there  is 
danger  in  our  system,  I  reply  that  the  worst  thing  which  you  can  prophesy  as 
a  result  of  free  coinage  is  better  than  the  best  thing  that  you  can  hope  for 
under  the  gold  standard;  and  more  than  that,  we  not  only  believe  we  have 
the  strength  and  ability  to  furnish  a  use  for  silver  that  will  take  all  the  surplus 
silver  upon  the  market  and  maintain  the  parity  at  l6  to  i,  but  we  believe  that  the 
action  of  the  United  States  instead  of  discouraging  other  nations,  will  compel 
them  to  join  with  us.  So  long  as  our  foreign  creditors  can  drive  down  the 
price  of  our  products  and  drive  up  the  value  of  the  money  which  we  pay  them, 
they  will  have  a  selfish  interest  in  maintaining  the  gold  standard  and  depress- 
ing prices,  and  if — to  follow  up  ^Ir.  Washburn's  suggestion — they  are  dominated 
by  human  selfishness,  they  will  do  it.  What  will  be  the  result  when  we  open 
our  mints  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver?  Do  you  say  that  foreign  creditors  will 
draw  all  their  money  out  of  this  country?  If  they  try  that,  how  far  would 
they  go  before  they  got  all  the  gold?  We  have  not  gold  enough  in  this  coun- 
try to  pay  one-tenth  of  our  foreign  indebtedness,  and  if  our  foreign  creditors 
attempted  to  collect  all  their  debts  they  would  have  to  take  nine-tenths  of  it 
in  silver  or  in  products.  When  our  foreign  creditors  find  that  the  American 
people  have  opened  the  mints  to  -the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  and 
made  silver  a  legal  tender  equal  with  gold,  so  that  all  coin  obligations  can 
be  discharged  in  silver,  then  they  will  become  interested  with  us  in  making 
the  silver  dollar  as  good  as  the  gold  dollar.  We  have  their  selfishness  against 
us  and  we  have  suffered  from  it.  Open  the  mints  to  the  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  silver,  and  we  will  bring  their  selfish  interests  over  to  our  side  of  the 
question.  Open  our  mints,  give  us  the  double  standard,  and  then  we  stand 
as  the  mistress  of  the  world's  commerce.  We  will  then  invite  the  trade  of  the 
gold  standard  countries  and  the  trade  of  the  silver  standard  countries  also,  and 
the  other  commercial  nations  would  have  to  come  to  the  double  standard  or  be 


AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH.  "  547 

outstripped  in  the  race.  Washington,  in  his  farewell  address,  not  only  warned 
our  people  against  foreign  influence  in  our  domestic  affairs,  but  stated  what 
everybody  must  know  to  be  true,  that  disinterested  favors  are  not  to  be  expected 
between  nations.  One  nation  cannot  be  expected  to  help  another  merely  out  of 
philanthropy,  but  nations  will  jo*n  together  in  the  promotion  of  those  things 
which  are  mutually  beneficial.  As  soon  as  we  have  shown  our  determination 
to  act  alone  and  to  protect  ourselves  against  the  degrading  influences  of  a  gold 
standard,  you  will  find  that  other  nations  will  be  willing  to  act  with  us,  but  they 
will  not  act  with  us  so  long  as  they  can  run  our  finances  and  attend  to  our 
business  for  us.  I  believe  that  nothing  good  can  come  to  our  people  until  we 
have  turned  over  a  new  leaf  in  our  financial  policy.  Instead  of  having  the 
financiers  of  Wall  street  call  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  before  them  and  tell 
him  what  he  must  do,  I  believe  the  time  has  come  when  the  Secretary,  standing 
as  the  representative  of  seventy  millions  of  people,  ought  to  call  the  financiers 
before  him  and  tell  them  what  they  must  do,  and  then  make  them  do  it.  When 
you  know  my  views  on  this  subject,  you  will  know  why  I  am  not  considered  a 
safe  man  by  the  Wall  street  financiers.  For  twenty  years  the  great  financial 
influences  have  dominated  the  national  conventions  of  the  two  great  parties 
The  same  financial  influences  have  written  the  platforms  and  have  nominated 
the  candidates.  Those  platforms  have  been  substantially  similar,  and  have 
I  eld  out  the  hope  of  international  bimetallism,  while  those  elected  have  been 
known  as  "safe  men."  The  financiers  have  nominated  candidates  entertaining 
similar  views  on  the  financial  question,  and  then  have  been  able  to  sit  back 
and  say,  "They  are  both  good  men."  The  only  trouble  in  this  campaign  was 
that  they  only  got  one  good  man;  only  one  candidate  for  the  presidency  who 
was  a  safe  man  in  the  opinion  of  the  New  York  financiers. 

We  do  not  expect  the  support  of  the  men  who  have  made  a  profit  out  of  the 
disasters  of  the  Government  after  they  have  brought  those  disasters  upon  the 
Government.  We  do  not  expect  the  support  of  those  financiers  who  have  been 
saving  the  honor  of  the  nation  at  so  much  per  save  for  the  last  twenty  years, 
but  when  we  lose  them,  I  think,  my  friends,  we  have  a  right  to  -appeal  to  the 
great  majority  of  the  people  who  are  tired  of  wearing  the  yoke  which  has  been 
fastened  upon  them. 

The  second  meeting  was  the  first  of  a  series  of  meetings  exclusively 
for  ladies.  Mrs.  Frank  A.  Valesh  was  the  presiding  officer  at  this, 
the  first  women's  meeting.  So  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  learn,  this 
was  an  innovation  in  campaigning.  These  ladies  were  not  voters,  but, 
as  wives,  sisters  and  mothers,  they  took  a  deep  interest  in  the  cam- 
paign, and  I  was  glad  to  defend  bimetallism  in  their  presence.  I 
give  in  full  the  speech  delivered  here : 

Minneapolis  Speech — To  the  Ladies* 

Ladies:  I  believe  this  is  the  first  political  campaign  in  which  a  presidential 
candidate  has  addressed  his  remarks  to  an  audience  composed  entirely  of  ladies 
and  discussed  an  economic  question  before  those  who  do  not  vote  upon  it,  and 
yet  I  offer  no  apology.     On  the  contrary,  I  deem  it  not  only  a  great  privilege 


548  A  T  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

but  a  great  honor.  My  experience  teaches  me  that  the  mother  and  the  wife  are 
important  members  of  the  family.  In  fact,  if  I  could  only  have  one  I  would 
rather  have  the  wife  on  my  side  in  the  beginning  of  the  campaign  than  the 
husband.  I  will  tell  you  why:  if  I  have  the  wife  I  am  almost  sure  to  have 
the  husband  before  the  campaign  is  over,  and  if  I  only  have  the  husband  I  am 
never  sure  of  keeping  him. 

Another  thing:  Some  of  the  best  arguments  which  have  been  advanced  on 
this  subject  have  been  advanced  by  the  women.  It  is  said  that  necessity  is  the 
mother  of  invention,  and  it  is  certainly  true  that  the  best  arguments  arise  from 
our  own  experiences.  The  women  have  been  learning  from  experience  what 
the  gold  standard  means.  A  lady  who  was  canvassing  in  Nebraska  gave  ut- 
terance the  other  day  to  one  of  the  best  things  which  this  campaign  has  thus 
far  produced.  She  called  at  our  house  to  secure  some  literature  on  the  silver 
question  to  circulate  as  she  went  from  place  to  place,  and  while  there  remarked 
that  she  had  a  brother  who  was  a  gold  man  without  any  gold.  She  said  that 
she  could  understand  how  a  man  could  be  a  gold  man  if  he  had  the  gold,  but 
that  she  could  only  pity  a  gold  man  without  any  gold. 

And  yet,  this  is  the  condition  in  which  a  large  majority  of  gold  men  find 
themselves — they  are  gold  men  without  any  gold.  When  you  find  a  gold  man 
without  the  gold  you  find  one  whom  you  can  convert.  He  has  simply  been 
misled.  While  the  gold  standard  is  a  good  thing  for  a  few,  it  is  a  bad  thing 
for  the  great  majority  of  the  American  people.  Our  cause  grows  from  day  to 
day,  and  the  reason  for  the  growth  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  arguments  in 
behalf  of  bimetallism  appeal  to  the  heads  of  those  who  think  and  to  the  hearts 
of  those  who  feel,  while  the  gold  standard  appeals  only  to  the  heartless.  The 
wives  and  mothers  are  taking  a  deeper  interest  than  usual  in  this  campaign  be- 
cause they  are  becoming  acquainted  with  the  effects  of  the  gold  standard.  They 
know  that  instead  of  being  a  just  measure  of  deferred  payments,  the  gold 
standard  has  become  a  measure  of  deferred  hope — and  hope  deferred  maketh 
the  heart  sick. 

The  money  question  is  not  too  deep  to  be  understood  by  the  American 
people.  The  great  questions  of  state  are,  after  all,  simple  in  their  last  analysis. 
Every  great  political  question  is  first  a  great  economic  question,  and  every  great 
economic  question  is  in  reality  a  great  moral  question.  Questions  are  not 
settled  until  the  right  and  wrong  of  the  questions  are  determined.  Questions 
are  not  settled  by  a  discussion  of  the  details;  they  are  not  settled  until  the  people 
grasp  the  fundamental  principles,  and  when  these  principles  are  fully  compre- 
hended, then  the  people  settle  the  question  and  they  settle  it  for  a  generation. 
The  people  are  studying  the  money  question,  studying  it  as  they  have  not 
studied  it  before;  aye,  studying  it  as  they  have  been  studying  no  economic 
question  before  in  your  lifetime  or  mine;  and  studying  means  understanding. 
To  study  we  must  commence  at  the  foundation  and  reason  upward. 

I  remember  hearing  a  sermon  preached  once,  in  the  course  of  which  the 
preacher  illustrated  the  difficulty  which  people  sometimes  encounter  in  the 
study  of  a  great  question.  He  said  that  if  one  attempted  to  draw  a  tree  through 
a  narrow  gate  by  taking  hold  of  one  of  the  branches,  he  would  find  that  the 
other  branches  would  spread  out  so  that  he  could  not  get  the  tree  through  the 
gate;  but  that  if  he  would  take  the  stem  or  trunk  of  the  tree  and  pull  that 


A  T  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH.  549 

through  first,  then  he  would  have  no  difficuhy.  I  often  think  of  that  illustration. 
A  study  of  the  details  without  a  knowledge  of  the  principles  involved  is  only  con- 
fusing, but  a  study  of  principles  makes  the  details  plain.  I  was  out  in  the 
West  about  a  year  ago,  and  I  noticed  their  great  systems  of  irrigation,  and 
as  I  watched  those  canals  wending  their  way  through  the  valleys,  this  thought 
came  to  me:  Upon  what  principle  is  irrigation  based?  And  then  it  occurred 
to  me  that  the  principle  was  a  very  simple  one,  namely,  that  water  runs  down 
hill.  Now  the  person  who  does  not  understand  that  water  runs  down  hiii 
can  never  make  a  success  of  irrigation;  but  when  a  person  understands  that 
water  runs  down  hill,  then  all  he  has  to  do  is  to  dig  a  ditch  with  a  slight  fall 
and  he  can  carry  water  anywhere.  So  in  the  study  of  the  money  question.  If 
you  fail  to  understand  the  fundamental  principles,  you  study  in  vain. 

Now  what  is  the  first  great  principle?  It  is  that  the  value  of  the  dollar 
depends  upon  the  number  of  dollars.  Dollars  can  be  made  dear  or  cheap  by 
changing  the  quantity  of  them.  This  is  a  simple  proposition,  it  is  fundamental 
and  when  you  understand  it  you  understand  the  most  important  thing  about 
the  money  question.  When  you  understand  that  the  value  of  a  dol- 
lar depends  upon  the  number  of  dollars,  then  you  not  only  understand  what 
a  change  in  the  volume  of  money  means,  but  you  understand  who  is  benefited 
by  it,  and  why  those  who  are  benefited  by  it  desire  it.  Let  me  illustrate  the 
principle.  Let  us  suppose  ourselves  walled  in  here  with  just  enough  wheat 
within  the  enclosure  to  last  us  a  j'ear;  and  let  us  suppose  that,  taking  the  supply 
and  demand  into  consideration,  wheat  is  worth  a  dollar  a  bushel.  Now  sup- 
pose the  wheat  to  be  gathered  into  two  great  piles  and  that  one  man  owns  one 
pile — or  to  suit  the  illustration  to  this  audience,  suppose  that  one  woman 
ov/ns  one  pile  and  that  another  woman  owns  the  other  pile;  and  suppose  that 
the  owner  of  one  pile  should  read  in  the  morning  paper  that  the  other  pile 
had  been  destroyed  by  fire.  Now  instead  of  the  people  having  both  piles  for 
the  year's  supply,  all  would  have  to  be  fed  from  one  pile,  and  what  would 
be  the  result?  Every  bushel  of  wheat  in  the  unburned  pile  would  rise  in 
value.  Why?  Because  the  demand  for  wheat  would  remain  the  same  and  the 
supply  of  wheat  would  be  reduced  one-half.  Now  what  is  the  second  thing  you 
learn?  That  the  woman  who  owns  the  pile  not  burned  will  profit  by  the  rise 
in  wheat.  And  what  is  the  third?  She  would  be  glad  that  it  was  the  other 
pile  of  wheat  that  burned  instead  of  hers.  Now  that  is  a  simple  illustration. 
Let  me  apply  it  to  the  silver  question.  According  to  statistics  we  have  about 
four  billions  of  silver  money  in  the  world  and  about  four  billions  of  gold 
money.  Suppose  we  destroy  the  silver  pile  and  make  the  gold  pile  do  the 
work  of  both,  what  is  the  result?  The  demand  for  money  would  remain  the 
same,  and  the  supply  of  standard  money  would  be  reduced  one-half.  The  result 
must  be  a  rise  in  the  value  of  each  dollar.  When  wheat  rises  in  value  a  bushel 
of  wheat  buys  more  money;  when  money  rises  in  value  a  dollar  in  money  buys 
more  wheat.  What  is  the  second  result?  The  people  who  own  the  money,  or 
who  own  contracts  payable  in  dollars,  profit  by  the  rise.  And  third?  They  arc 
glad  that  they  make  the  profit.  Now  is  that  an  unfair  application  of  the 
illustration?  What  I  illustrate  by  argument  I  can  enforce  by  authority.  Sen- 
ator Sherman  stated  in  1869  that  a  contraction  of  the  currency  would  bring 
disaster,  bankruptcy,  etc.,  to  all  the  people  except  the  capitalists  out  of  debt. 


550  AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

the  salaried  officer  and  the  annuitant.  These  are  exempt  from  the  evil  effects 
cf  a  rising  dollar,  because,  standing  in  the  position  of  those  who  own  money 
or  money  contracts  and  having  no  debts,  they  profit  when  their  property — • 
money — increases  in  value..  If  I  tell  you  that  the  owner  of  land  profits  when 
his  land  rises  in  value,  you  believe  me.  If  I  tell  you  that  the  owner  of  any 
kind  of  property  profits  when  that  property  rises  in  value,  you  believe  mc. 
When  I  tell  you  that  the  owner  of  money  profits  when  money  rises  in  value,  you 
cannot  refuse  to  believe  me. 

Mr.  Blaine  spoke  on  the  same  subject  in  1878,  and  said  that  the  destruction 
of  silver  as  money  and  the  establishment  of  gold  as  the  sole  unit  of  value  would 
have  a  ruinous  effect  on  all  forms  of  property  except  those  investments  which 
3  ield  a  fixed  return  in  money.  These,  he  said,  would  be  enormously  enhanced 
in  value,  and  would  be  given  a  disproportionate  and  unfair  advantage  over  every 
other  species  of  property. 

Others  have  spoken  along  the  same  line.  In  1891  the  present  Republican 
candidate  for  the  Presidency,  speaking  at  Toledo,  Ohio,  condemned  Mr.  Cleve- 
land for  his  efforts  to  degrade  silver  and  to  contract  the  currency.  He  said  in 
that  denunciation  that  Mr.  Cleveland  was  making  money  dearer  by  making  it 
scarcer;  that  he  was  making  money  the  master — all  thin^  else  the  servant. 
My  friends,  these  principles  have  long  been  understood,  and  it  is  only  recently 
that  our  opponents  have  been  compelled  to  repudiate  history  and  reject  the 
teachings  of  experience  in  order  to  defend  a  system  which  has  nothing  to 
commend  it  except  the  misery  which  has  followed  wherever  it  has  been  tried. 

The  gold  standard  means  dearer  money;  dearer  money  means  cheaper 
property;  cheaper  property  means  harder  times;  harder  times  means  more 
people  out  of  work:  more  people  out  of  work  means  more  people  destitute; 
more  people  destitute  means  more  people  desperate;  more  people  desperate 
means  more  crime. 

My  friends,  you  are  charitable;  you  willingly  give  of  your  abundance  to 
help  those  who  are  in  distress,  but  remember  that  the  poor  people  of  this 
country  are  not  now  asking  charity  of  you  so  much  as  they  are  demanding 
justice. 

It  has  been  said  that  woman  is  the  conscience  of  the  human  race,  and  I 
endorse  the  proposition.  "  I  believe  that  women  can  grasp  the  great  principles  of 
justice  and  can  detect  right  from  wrong  probably  with  more  clearness  and  with 
more  distinctness  than  men,  because  they  are  not  surrounded  by  so  many  of 
the  influences,  personal  and  political,  which  may  prevent  a  real  understanding 
of  the  issues  involved.  I  therefore  appeal  to  you,  who  are  interested  in  your 
sons  and  daughters,  to  look  well  before  you  throw  your  influence  on  the  side 
of  the  gold  standard,  which  means  more  wealth  to  the  few,  but  more  poverty 
and  misery  for  the  many. 

And  remember  this,  you  cannot  live  for  yourselves  alone;  nor  can  you 
control  the  destinies  of  those  whom  you  leave.  If  you  could  provide  against  all 
future  contingencies;  if  you  could  leave  your  money  to  your  children  and  be 
sure  that,  to  the  remotest  generation,  it  would  protect  them  from  want  and 
misery,  you  might  feel  indifferent;  but  you  cannot  do  this.  You  cannot  guard 
them  after  you  are  gone  and  you  cannot  make  j'our  wealth  stay  with  them. 
Even  if  you  leave  it  to  them  it  may  injure  rather  than  aid  them.    You  can 


AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH.  551 

only  leave  them  one  thing  which  is  sure  to  be  a  blessing,  namely,  a  good 
government.  Leave  them  a  government  which,  instead  of  giving  favors  to  a 
few  at  the  expense  of  the  many,  will  protect  every  citizen  in  the  enjoyment  of 
life,  of  liberty  and  in  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  and  you  leave  your  children  the 
richest  possible  heritage. 

The  cities  have  not  felt  the  pinch  of  the  gold  standard  as  quickly  as  the 
country  has,  and  when  you,  mothers  and  wives,  are  enjoying  the  comforts  of 
life — if  you  have  still  escaped-^I  beg  you  to  give  one  moment's  thought  to  the 
mothers  and  wives  throughout  this  land  whose  lot  has  been  made  harder  and 
whose  life  has  been  made  darker  by  the  gold  standard.  You  -may  read  its 
history  and  you  will  find  that  the  gold  standard  never  brought  a  ray  of  hope 
to  those  who  sat  in  darkness;  never  gave  inspiration  and  hope  to  those  who 
are  disheartened.  According  to  Mr.  Carlisle,  when  he  spoke  in  1878,  the  con- 
summation of  the  scheme  to  destroy  one-half  the  money  of  the  world  would 
ultimately  entail  upon  the  human  race  more  misery  than  has  been  wrought 
by  all  the  wars,  pestilences  and  famines  that  have  ever  occurred  in  the  history 
of  the  world.  I  believe  that  he  was  right.  Enter,  if  you  will,  into  the  homes 
of  the  land  and  see  how  the  living  expenses  have  been  cut  down  because  other 
expenses  could  not  be  cut  dov/n.  See  how  prices  have  fallen  while  debts,  taxes 
and  other  fixed  charges  have  refused  to  fall.  Go  into  the  home  where  the  mort- 
gage is  being  foreclosed — where  the  husband  and  wife  started  out  with  the 
laudable  ambition  to  own  a  home,  paid  down  what  they  had  saved  with  the 
expectation  of  being  able  to  pay  the  balance,  but  which  the  gold  standard, 
with  its  rising  dollar  and  its  falling  prices,  has  made  it  impossible  to  pay. 
Multiply  this  case  by  the  number  of  such  cases  and  then  remember,  my  friends, 
that  all  that  these  families  have  lost  has  been  gained  by  those  who  hold  fixed 
investments,  who  trade  in  money  and  profit  by  the  adversities  of  the  people. 

The  gold  standard  has  been  tried  in  this  country  for  twenty  years  and  yet 
no  party  has  ever  declared  it  to  be  good.  It  has  been  tried  in  Germany,  and 
Prince  Bismarck  tells  you  in  a  recent  letter  that  he  is  in  favor  of  bimetallism. 
If  the  gold  standard  has  been  a  blessing  to  Germany,  why  does  Prince  Bismarck 
desire  to  go  back  to  bimetallism?  Prince  Bismarck  speaks  for  the  great  mass 
of  the  people.  Only  a  little  more  than  a  year  ago  they  passed  through  the 
Reichstag  a  resolution  declaring  in  favor  of  the  restoration  of  bimetallism,  but 
the  Berlin  Chamber  of  Commerce  declared  against  it.  So  it  is  everywhere. 
If  you  will  take  from  the  gold  standard  the  support  of  the  monied  classes  it 
cannot  stand  for  a  day  in  any  nation  which  now  has  it.  The  gold  standard  has 
never  been  supported  by  the  masses;  it  has  never  received  the  endorsement  of 
the  creators  of  wealth.  It  has  been  fastened  upon  the  people  by  the  drones 
of  society,  not  by  the  bees  who  make  the  honey. 

Let  me  suggest  a  way  in  which  you  can  detect  truth  from  error  in  this 
case.  What  do  our  opponents  talk  about?  The  gold  standard?  Oh,  no. 
They  talk  about  sound  money.  Now  you  know  human  nature,  and  you  know 
that  a  man  never  uses  an  ambiguous  phrase  when  a  clear  one  will  express  the 
meaning,  if  he  desires  to  have  the  meaning  expressed.  You  do  not  use  am- 
biguous phrases  when  you  talk  to  your  friends.  You  do  not  use  language  in 
a  double  sense  when  you  desire  to  be  understood.  It  is  only  when  you  are 
evading  questions  and  dodging  issues  that  you  use  language  which  can  be  con- 


552  AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

strued  in  any  way.  When  you  find  advocates  of  the  gold  standard  using 
the  phrase  "sound  money"  instead  of  the  gold  standard,  you  may  rest  assured 
that  they  use  the  phrase  because  it  sounds  better  than  the  gold  standard.  You 
hear  them  talking  about  honest  money;  why  do  they  not  tell  us  what  they  mean 
by  honest  money?  We  desire  honest  money  and  we  believe  that  we  arc 
advocating  a  dollar  more  nearly  honest  than  the  gold  dollar  under  a  gold  stand- 
ard. We  say  that  we  want  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  the  unlimited  coinage 
of  silver,  coinage  at  i6  to  i  and  coinage  immediately,  without  waiting  for  the 
aid  or  consent  of  any  other  nation.  We  tell  you  what  we  want,  why  we  want 
it  and  how  we  expect  to  secure  it,  and  I  believe  that  those  who  have  con- 
fidence enough  in  the  people  to  elaborate  their  plans  before  the  people,  have 
more  claim  upon  the  confidence  of  the  people  than  those  who  expect  the  people 
to  trust  them,  but  who  will  not  themselves  trust  the  people. 

Sometimes  our  opponents  say  that,  even  if  demonetization  is  wrong,  it  is 
unwise  to  go  back  to  bimetallism.  It  is  not  simply  a  question  of  going  back. 
We  have  not  reached  the  end  of  the  gold  standard  yet;  we  have  simply  com- 
menced; we  are  just  getting  a  good  start  in  the  direction  of  the  gold  standard. 
We  are  not  upon  a  gold  standard  level,  we  are  on  a  decline.  If  you  say  that  it 
is  wrong  to  take  from  gold  some  of  its  purchasing  power,  I  reply  that  the 
question  is  not  whether  we  shall  leave  gold  purchasing  the  same  that  it  docs 
now.  The  question  is  whether  we  will  take  out  of  the  gold  some  of  its  purchas- 
ing power  or  go  on  crowding  into  gold  more  and  more  purchasing  power.  If 
you  say  that  it  is  not  fair  to  pay  back  a  dollar  which  will  buy  less  than  the 
dollar  borrowed,  I  reply  that  if  you  are  advocating  the  gold  standard  you  are 
advocating  a  system  which  makes  every  man  who  borrovrs  money  pay  back 
a  larger  dollar  than  he  borrowed.  If  you  demand  exact  equity  you  must  be 
willing  to  do  equity. 

I  repeat  that  we  are  on  a  declining  plane;  that  we  are  going  down,  and  that 
under  the  gold  standard  gold  will  be  made  dearer  still,  for  every  nation  that 
goes  to  the  gold  standard  will  increase  the  demand  for  gold,  and  every  new 
demand  for  gold  will  raise  the  purchasing  power  of  an  ounce  of  gold  and  de- 
press prices.  The  result  will  be  that  when  nation  after  nation  has  joined  in  this 
crusade  for  gold,  we  shall  simply  compel  all  mankind  to  bid  for  that  metal, 
and  the  one  who  offers' the  most  of  the  products  of  his  toil  will  secure  the 
metal  until  some  one  bids  more  than  he.  Under  the  gold  standard,  joined  in  by 
all  the  nations,  the  moment  a  little  gold  goes  out  of  the  country  commerce 
will  be  at  a  standstill,  and  you  must  either  issue  bonds  and  bring  gold  back  or 
lower  prices  and  bring  it  back  in  that  way,  and  the  moment  it  comes  back  there 
will  be  a  struggle  among  other  nations  to  get  it  from  us  again.  The  gold  stand- 
ard simply  means  that  commerce  will  always  be  agitated  and  the  few  who  hold 
the  money  of  the  world  will  be  able  to  loan  it  first  to  one  nation  and  then  to 
another,  and  thus  gather  in  all  the  fruits  of  those  who  toil,  while  the  masses 
of  the  people  will  be  hewers  of  wood  and  haulers  of  water  receiving  each  year 
less  consideration  and  enjoying  less  of  comfort  than  they  did  the  year  before. 

Do  you  think  that  this  condition  can  last?  No,  my  friends,  no  condition 
of  bondage  was  ever  permanent.  The  taskmaster  has  always  thought  that  his 
supremacy  would  be  safe  if  he  could  only  stop  the  complaint  of  those  who 
served  under  him,  but  you  cannot  stop  the  complaint  until  you  take  away  the 
cause  of  complaint.    The  taskmaster  is  never  wise  enough  to  see  that  agita- 


AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH.  553 

tion  will  exist  while  there  is  cause  for  dissatisfaction.  Do  you  tell  me  that  the 
gold  standard  can  be  made  permanent?  I  must  change  my  opinion  of  the 
Almighty's  love  before  I  can  believe  that  he  intended  the  great  majority  of  the 
human  race  to  toil  while  a  few  grow  fat  by  despoiling  them.  Do  you  tell  me 
that  civilization  must  result  in  driving  the  extremes  of  society  farther  apart? 
No,  it  cannot  be  so.  When  we  talk  about  the  common  people — and  by  them 
we  mean  the  great  mass  of  people  who  do  not  assume  a  superiority  over  others 
— we  are  called  demagogues,  and  yet,  my  friends,  the  common  people  have  given 
to  the  world  all  that  it  has  of  good.  The  common  people  have  brought  to  so- 
ciety all  that  is  valuable.  Every  reform  has  come  up  from  the  people,  it  has 
never  come  down  from  the  well-to-do  of  society. 

If  you  ask  me  why,  I  point  to  a  wiser  than  any  human  teacher.  When  the 
Nazarene  gave  to  His  disciples  the  parable  of  the  sower,  and  spoke  of  the  seed 
that  fell  where  the  thorns  sprang  up  and  choked  it.  He  explained  that  He  meant 
that  the  cares  of  this  world  and  the  deceitfulness  of  riches  choked  the  truth. 
It  has  always  been  so.  The  cares  of  this  world  and  the  deceitfulness  of  riches 
have  always  choked  the  truth.  The  truth  has  not  come  from  those  who  did 
not  suffer,  it  has  not  come  from  those  who  were  above  want;  the  great  move- 
ments for  the  benefit  of  society  have  come  from  those  who  needed  to  have  soci- 
ety improved  and  their  needs  have  been  the  stimulus  to  their  actions. 

Do  not  despise  these  people  who  complain  of  their  condition.  The  Bible 
tells  us  that  when  Christ  preached,  those  who  devoured  widows'  houses  would 
have  turned  Him  away,  but  that  the  common  people  heard  Him  gladly.  And 
yet,  my  friends,  it  is  the  common  people  who  today  are  accused  of  being  inca- 
pable of  self-government.  I  assert  that  the  common  people  of  this  nation  are 
the  only  ones  who  will  defend  Democratic  institutions.  It  is  the  common  peo- 
ple who  appreciate  our  form  of  government;  it  is  the  common  people  who  pro- 
duce the  wealth  of  the  nation  in  time  of  peace,  and  it  is  the  common  people,  and 
they  alone,  who  in  time  of  war  are  willing  to  offer  their  lives  in  their  nation's 
defense.  Do  not  ignore  them;  do  not  doubt  their  capacity  for  self-govern- 
ment; do  not  question  their  good  intent;  do  not  say  that  they  "have  no  cause 
for  complaint  when  they  ask  for  relief.  Our  opponents  declare  that  we  are 
opposed  to  the  enforcement  of  law.  We  who  stand  upon  the  Chicago  platform 
and  who  declare  in  favor  of  arbitration  instead  of  force  are  the  lovers  of  peace 
and  order.  We  believe  that  the  principles  of  justice  administered  in  our  courts 
can  also  be  administered  by  boards  of  arbitration,  and  we  believe  that  those  who 
have  a  just  cause  ought  to  be  willing  to  submit  that  cause  to  impartial  arbi- 
trators and  abide  the  result.  It  is  only  error  that  shuns  the  court  and  seeks 
to  substitute  might  for  right. 

I  only  came  to  speak  to  you  for  a  moment,  but  the  presence  of  so  many  and 
the  interest  manifested  by  you  have  caused  me  to  talk  longer  than  I  intended. 
I  beg  you  to  realize  that  we  are  passing  through  a  crisis  in  human  affairs.  This 
is  no  small  contest.  We"  have  arrayed  on  either  side  the  great  forces  of  society. 
Against  us  are  those  influences  which  are  considered  strong  and  potential — 
money,  the  corporations  and  the  high  positions  in  politics  and  society,  but  on 
our  side  I  believe,  my  friends,  is  simple  justice.  We  are  opposed  to  the  trusts. 
We  want  our  sons  to  be  permitted  to  enter  life  with  an  even  chance  without 
becoming  favorites  of  some  great  monopoly.  We  want  our  children  and  our 
children's  children  to  have  a  right  to  their  place  in  the  race  of  life  without  fear 


554  AT  MINNEAPOLIS  AND  DULUTH. 

of  being  crowded  out  by  those  great  aggregations  of  wealth  which  are  tramp- 
ling upon  the  rights  of  individuals.  We  want  this  nation  to  be  what  our  fore- 
fathers intended  it  to  be.  Jefferson  was  a  better  Republican  than  any  Repub- 
lican who  stands  upon  the  Republican  platform  and  desires  to  transfer  into  the 
hands  of  foreign  nations  the  right  to  legislate  over  matters  of  domestic  impor- 
tance. And,  my  friends,  Lincoln  was  a  better  Democrat  than  any  Democrat 
who  has  left  the  Democratic  party  in  this  campaign  to  cast  in  his  lot  with  our 
opponents.  And  why?  Because  upon  the  fundamental  principles  Jefferson  and 
Lincoln  stood  together.  They  believed  in  the  people;  they  believed  in  our  form 
of  government,  and  they  believed  that  this  form  of  government  was  intended 
to  be  perpetuated  for  the  benefit  of  all  the  people  and  not  for  the  benefit  oi  a 
few  alone.  We  have  a  great  fight  on  hand  now  to  determine  whether  the  peo- 
ple have  a  right  to  govern  themselves,  and  it  is  not  strange  that  in  this  fight 
we  see  men  who  voted  for  Lincoln  taking  the  place  of  men  who  have  been 
Democrats  until  this  campaign. 

I  am  not  here  to  tell  you  upon  which  side  your  influence  should  be  cast, 
but  I  do  appeal  to  you  to  recognize  the  crisis  through  which  we  are  passing, 
to  recognize  the  issues  at  stake,  to  recognize  the  tremendous  consequences 
which  may  follow,  and  then  to  throw  your  influence  upon  the  side  that  you  think 
is  right.  I  am  willing  to  trust  the  judgment  of  the  American  people;  I  am 
willing  to  trust  the  conscience  of  the  people  because  they  have  always  been 
sufficient  in  the  past  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  in  this  great  crisis,  whether  it  is 
settled  now  or  hereafter,  the  judgment  and  the  conscience  of  our  people  will  be 
sufficient  to  guide  us  aright,  to  make  our  government  better,  to  make  our  peo- 
ple happier,  and  to  bring  to  all  the  people  that  joy  and  prosperity  which  the 
gold  standard  has  confined  to  so  small  a  portion. 

I  thank  you  again  and  again  for  the  honor  that  you  did  me  in  inviting  me 
to  address  you  and  for  the  courtesy  which  you  have  shown  me. 

The  third  and  fourth  meetings  were  out  of  doors,  and  the  speeches 
were  brief.  While  in  MinneapoHs  a  brief  reception  was  given  at  the 
West,  and  a  portion  of  the  time  spent  at  the  home  of  my  old  college 
friend   Hon.  S.  B.  Howard. 

Tuesday  morning  found  us  on  our  way  to  Duluth  by  way  of 
Sauk  Rapids,  Staples,  Brainerd  and  West  Superior. 

The  Duluth  meeting  was  presided  over  by  Congressman  Charles 
A.  Towne,  who  was  a  candidate  for  re-election  on  the  fusion  ticket  in 
that  district. 

I  found  that  !Mr.  Towne  had  a  strong  support  among  his  neigh- 
bors in  the  city  madfe  famous  by  Proctor  Knott's  speech. 

At  Duluth,  also,  there  was  a  ladies'  meeting,  fully  as  large  as  the 
one  at  ^Minneapolis,  but  owing  to  our  late  arrival  and  early  departure, 
I  spoke  but  a  few  minutes  at  this  meeting. 

Hon.  John  Lind,  whom  I  had  learned  to  admire  when  we  served 
together  in  Congress,  was  the  fusion  candidate  for  Governor,  and  I 
was  much  gratified  to  note  the  harmony  which  existed  in  Minnesota 
between  the  three  divisions  of  the  silver  forces. 


CHAPTER  XLIV. 


THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS. 

UPON  our  arrival  in  Duluth  we  found  the  Michigan  committee 
in  waiting.  It  consisted  of  Daniel  J.  Campau,  Esq.,  chair- 
man of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Democratic  National 
Committee;  ex-Congressman  Justin  R.  Whiting  and  wife,  Hon. 
Charles  R.  Sligh  and -wife,  and  ex-Congressman  Tim  Tarsney.  Mr. 
Whiting,  candidate  for  Lieutenant-Governor  in  the  campaign  just 
closed,  was  a  colleague  on  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee,  and  his 
wife  was  one  of  Mrs.  Bryan's  most  intimate  friends  while  we  were  in 
Washington.  Mr.  Sligh  was  the  fusion  candidate  for  Governor  last  fall. 
The  party  left  Duluth  Tuesday  night  and  spent  four  days  in  the 
State  of  Michigan.  The  principal  speeches  made  Wednesday  were 
delivered  at  Iron  Mountain,  Ishpeming  and  Marquette,  with  shorter 
stops  at  a  number  of  smaller  places.  Going  from  Marquette  to  St. 
Ignace  in  the  night,  we  crossed  the  Straits  of  Mackinac  and  held  an 
early  morning  meeting  at  Mackinaw  City.  The  largest  meetings  held 
Thursday  were  at  Traverse  City,  Big  Rapids  and  Grand  Rapids.  At 
the  first  place  mentioned  the  presiding  officer  was  Hon.  James 
Roberts,  a  classmate  of  my  father  at  McKenc'ree  College.  Three 
speeches  were  delivered  at  Grand  Rapids,  the  first  at  an  outdoor 
meeting  in  Campau  Square,  the  second  at  a  meeting  attended  by 
women  only,  and  the  third,  to  a  mixed  audience,  the  largest  of  the 
evening.    Below  will  be  found  the  speech  to  the  ladies : 

Grand  Rapids  Speech — To  the  Ladies, 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies — I  had  intended  to  say  "and  Gentlemen,"  but  I  think 
there  are  hardly  enough  gentlemen  in  the  audience  to  deserve  mention.  I  saw 
in  the  evening  paper  that  after  a  certain  hour  the  gentlemen  vi^ere  to  be  admit- 
ted. I  do  not  know  whether  that  hour  has  arrived  yet  or  not,  but  it  seems  that 
the  gentlemen  are  not  here. 

I  desire  to  talk  to  you  just  a  little  while  about  the  silver  question,  and  I 
desire,  if  I  can,  to  help  you  to  understand  what  bimetallism  means  and  what 
the  gold  standard  means  in  order  that  you  may  decide  on  which  side  of  the 
question  you  ought  to  stand.  In  a  great  contest  like  this,  we  must  be  on  one 
side  or  the  other— there  is  no  middle  ground.  If  the  gold  standard  is  right  we 
ought  to  be  for  it;  if  the  gold  standard  is  wrong  we  ought  to  be  against  it. 
But,  my  friends,  you  need  not  hope  that  everybody  will  think  the  same  way 

555 


556  .  THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS. 

upon  the  money  question  even  after  investigation.  There  is  a  valid  reason  for 
these  differences  of  opinion;  they  spring  largely  from  difference  of  interest.  I 
do  not  want  you  to  think  that  I  am  putting  politics  on  a  low  plane  when  I  tell 
you  that  a  person's  interests  will  affect  that  person's  judgment  on  any  political 
question.  Let  me  illustrate:  I  used  to  live  at  Jacksonville,  111.,  and  while 
I  lived  there,  there  was  an  election  and  the  question  to  be  determined  was 
whether  cows  should  run  at  large.  It  was  an  exciting  election.  People  would 
gather  upon  the  streets  and  discuss  the  subject  and  you  would  frequently  hear 
an  argument  like  this:  One  person  would  say,  "The  cows  ought  to  be  allowed 
to  run  at  large.  The  graSs  is  going  to  waste  in  the  streets;  it  is  better  for  the 
city  to  have  the  cows  run  at  large  and  eat  the  grass  up."  You  would  find  that 
he  had  a  cow.  Then  another  would  say,  "The  cows  ought  to  be  shut  up. 
You  cannot  leave  your  gate  open  at  night  without  danger  that  the  cows  v/ill 
get  in  and  ruin  your  garden.  It  is  better  for  the  city  to  have  the  cows  shut 
up."  And  you  would  find  that  he  did  not  have  any  cow.  When  the  vote  was 
counted  it  was  found  that  each  voter  was  largely  influenced  by  the  question, 
whether  he  kept  a  cow  or  not.  Now  if  you  have  ever  passed  through  an  elec- 
tion where  that  question  was  submitted  to  the  people  you  will  recognize  what 
I  say  to  be  true,  that  the  cost  of  keeping  a  cow  will  largely  determine  the  vote 
of  a  person  upon  the  question.  If  that  is  true  in  small  things  it  is  also  true  in 
large  things;  some  people  want  the  gold  standard  because  they,  so  to  speak, 
have  cows  running  at  large.  It  is  bad  enough  to  have  them  feeding  their  cows 
upon  the  public  domain,  but  they  are  not  satisfied  with  that.  They  want  to 
feed  their  cows  upon  private  pastures  as  well. 

When  a  person  takes  a  position  upon  any  question  you  have  a  right  to 
examine  and  see  what  that  person's  business  is  and  what  his  interests  are. 

I  desire  to  admit  in  the  very  beginning  that  there  are  some  people  who 
would  be  temporarily  benefited  by  the  gold  standard.  Let  me  suppose  a  case. 
If  a  person's  property  is  entirely  invested  in  government  bonds  which  run  for 
a  long  time,  such  a  person  would  be  benefited  by  a  gold  standard.  Why? 
Because  the  bonds  draw  a  fixed  rate  of  interest  and  that  interest  is  payable 
quarterly.  As  the  dollars  rise  in  value  the  interest,  remaining  the  same  in  dol- 
lars, buys  more  and  more  and  therefore  the  person  who  receives  the  interest  is 
benefited  each  year — that  is,  his  interest  will  buy  more  of  the  things  which  he 
desires,  or,  if  he  does  not  desire  to  buy  more,  he  is  able  to  save  more  out  of  his 
interest  each  year  and  add  it  to  his  capital.  I  say  that  such  a  person  will  be 
temporarily  benefited.  But  mark  you,  I  say  temporarily  benefited.  And  why? 
Because  while  the  person  may  be  benefited  by  the  gold  standard  that  person's 
children  may  be  cursed  by  the  same  thing  which  has  blessed  him.  We  cannot 
afford  to  engraft  upon  government  a  bad  financial  system  even  though  we  get 
a  temporary  benefit  from  it.  The  best  thing  that  parents  can  leave  to  their 
children  is  a  just  government  which  robs  nobody  for  the  benefit  of  others. 
Now,  in  the  discussion  of  the  money  question  we  can  prove  our  case  in  many 
ways.  We  can  apply  well  known  principles  to  this  question  and  by  the  applica- 
tion of  those  principles  we  can  make  the  subject  clear.  But  if  this  is  not  suf- 
ficient, we  can  prove  our  case  by  authority.  There  is  not  a  position  which  we 
take  in  this  campaign  which  we  are  not  able  to  support  by  authority  from  the 
most  eminent  Republicans  in  this  country. 


THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS.  557 

You  will  remember  that  a  few  years  ago  there  was  a  great  deal  of  talk 
about  a  character  in  fiction — I  do  not  know  whether  I  ought  to  call  it  a  char- 
acter or  two  characters — but  it  was  Doctor  Jekyll  and  Mr,  Hyde.  You  will 
remember  that  the  same  person  appeared  at  different  times  in  the  different  char- 
acters. At  one  time  the  man  was  a  good  man,  benevolent,  kindly  disposed; 
at  another  time  the  same  person  was  a  bad  man  and  even  sought  to  take 
human  life.  We  have  the  character  of  Jekyll  and  Hyde  illustrated  wel'  when 
we  come  to  discuss  the  silver  question,  because  we  can  cite  you  to  a  number 
of  men  who  have  been  both  Jekyll  and  Hyde  on  the  money  question.  We  can 
point  to  a  number  of  men  who  have  been  kindly  disposed  and  interested  in 
the  public  welfare  at  one  time  and  who  at  another  time  have  been  supporting  a 
linancial  system  which,  according  to  Mr.  Carlisle,  means  more  of  misery  to  the 
human  race  than  all  the  wars,  pestilences  and  famines  that  have  ever  occurred 
in  the  history  of  the  world. 

Let  me  call  your  attention  to  two  or  three  persons  who  have  spoken  on 
both  sides  of  the  money  question.  Our  opponents  have  been  able  to  bring 
into  the  campaign  all  the  movable  guns  in  the  country.  They  have  enlisted  on 
their  side  and  are  sending  out  a  great  many  pieces  of  large  artillery,  and  one 
of  the  ablest  speakers  whom  they  have  sent  out  is  Col.  Ingersoll.  Mr.  Inger- 
soll  brings  to  the  money  question  his  great  ability  as  an  orator  and  is  now 
using  his  chief  weapon,  ridicule,  against  silver.  Let  me  show  you  what  he 
once  said  on  the  other  side  of  the  question,  and,  my  friends,  he  will  have  to 
talk  a  long  while  before  he  can  answer  what  he  has  said  on  our  side.  I  think 
it  is  fair  to  assume  that  we  still  have  with  us  all  those  who,  although  they  may 
have  turned,  have  not  yet  been  able  to  answer  themselves.  Here  is  what  Air. 
Ingersoll  said  in  a  speech  made  some  years  ago  to  the  farmers — it  is  printed 
in  a  pamphlet  issued  by  Mr.  Baldwin,  184  Madison  street,  Chicago.  In  that 
speech  Mr.  Ingersoll  said: 

For  my  part  I  do  not  ask  any  Interference  on  the  part  of  the  Government  except  to 
undo  the  wrong  it  has  done.  I  do  not  ask  that  money  be  made  out  of  nothing.  I  do  not 
ask  for  the  prosperity  born  of  paper,  but  I  do  ask  for  the  remonetization  of  silver;  silver  was 
demonetized  by  fraud.  It  was  an  imposition  upon  every  solvent  man,  a  fraud  upon  every 
honest  debtor  in  the  United  States.  It  assassinated  labor.  It  was  done  in  the  Interest  of 
avarice  and  greed  and  should  be  undone  by  honest  men.  The  farmers  should  vote  only 
for  such  men  as  are  able  and  willing  to  guard  and  advance  the  interests  of  labor. 

That  is  what  he  said  when  he  spoke  to  the  farmers  some  years  ago.  What 
he  said  was  true  then  and  is  true  now.  Silver  was  excluded  from  the  mints  by 
a  law  which  was  never  discussed  by  the  American  people.  No  wonder  the 
American  people  have  demanded  the  remonetization  of  silver,  and  yet,  my 
friends,  that  act,  passed  secretly  and  in  the  dark,  has  been  upon  the  statute 
books  ever  since.  The  people  have  remonstrated  to  some  extent  but  they 
have  never  been  able  to  undo  that  wrong.  Why?  Because  sometimes  we  have 
had  the  House  of  Representatives  for  silver  and  sometimes  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States,  but  we  have  never  been  able  to  get  both  House  and  Senate  at 
the  same  time;  and  if  we  had  succeeded  in  getting  both  House  and  Senate,  the 
President  has  always  been  against  us  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  has 
always  received  his  inspiration  from  Wall  Street  rather  than  from  the  people. 
For  twenty  years  the  people  have  tried  to  undo  this  wrong  which  Mr.  Ingersoll 
described  with  so  much  vividness. 


558  THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS. 

Now  you  will  notice  that  one  of  the  most  distinguished  journalists  of  this 
day,  one  of  the  most  eminent  men  in  his  profession,  Mr.  Murat  Halstead,  is 
doing  all  he  can  to  maintain  the  gold  standard.  Let  me  read  you  what  he  said 
on  the  subject  a  few  years  ago.  In  a  letter  dated  October  24,  1877 — I  take  the 
extracts  from  the  New  York  Journal  of  last  Saturday,  October  10 — Mr.  Hal- 
stead  said: 

This  British  gold  policy  was  the  work  of  experts  only.  Evasion,  was  essential  to  suc- 
cess in  it,  and  possible  because  coin  was  not  in  circulation,  and,  being  out  of  public  view, 
could  be  tampered  with  without  attracting  attention.  The  mocometalllc  system  of  the 
great  creditor  nation  was  thus  imposed  upon  the  great  debtor  nation  without  debate. 

Mr.  Halstead  thus  declares  that  this  is  a  British  policy  and  furthermore  he 
declares  that  the  monometallic  system  of  the  great  creditor  nation  was  imposed 
upon  this  debtor  nation  without  debate.  It  was  a  British  policy  then  and  it  is 
a  British  policy  today,  and  all  that  we  ask  is  to  replace  a  British  policy  with  an 
American  policj'.  In  another  part  of  his  letter  he  explains  the  advantage  of 
bimetallism.    He  says: 

The  two  metals  support  and  regulate  each  other.  The  two  afford  an  adequate  basis 
for  an  abundant  currency,  and  neither  can  be  "cornered"  in  aid  of  the  speculative  schemes 
that  are  often  prepared  and  always  opposed  to  the  general  welfare.  If  one  metal  rated 
according  to  the  fixed  ratio  becomes  dead,  the  option  of  payment  in  the  cheaper  coin  makes 
a  demand  for  it  that  enhances  its  value,  and  the  money  unit  is  subjected  to  slighter  fluc- 
tuations, in  comparison  with  commodities,  than  if  founded  upon  but  one  metal.  Copper 
and  steel  together  in  the  compensation  balance  wheel  of  a  chronometer,  and  perfectly  meas- 
uring time  through  all  temperatures,  illustrate  that  principle. 

So  Mr.  Halstead  at  that  time  understood  the  advantages  of  a  double 
standard  and  his  illustration  of  the  pendulum  is  an  apt  illustration  because  the 
metals  vary  in  expansion  under  different  temperatures  and  the  one  will  pom- 
pensate  the  other.  And  yet  you  will  find  men  who  did  understand  this  money 
question  years  ago  who  speak  today  as  though  they  had  never  known  anything 
about  the  science  of  money.  Can  they  have  forgotten  so  much  in  so  short  a 
time? 

But  let  me  quote  from  larger  men.  Secretary  Carlisle,  who  today  stands 
as  the  representative  of  those  Democrats  who  believe  in  the  gold  standard, 
spoke  on  this  subject  in  1878  and  in  that  speech  said: 

The  contest  now  goinjg  on  cannot  cease  and  ought  not  to  cease  until  the  industrial 
classes  are  fully  and  finally  emancipated  from  the  heartless  domination  of  the  syndicates, 
stock  exchanges  and  combinations  of  money  grabbers  in  this  country  and  in  Europe. 

This  is  the  language  which  Mr.  Carlisle  used  in  1878.  He  went  even  farther 
than  that  and  said:     (I  quote  the  substance.) 

We  have  passed  measure  after  measure  of  relief,  and  if  the  President  vetoes  the  meas- 
ures and  we  are  not  able  to  pass  them  over  his  veto  we  will  put  them  in  the  appropriation 
bills  with  the  'distinct  understanding  that,  if  the  people  can  get  no  relief,  the  Government 
can  get  no  money. 

Do  you  know  of  any  greater  condemnation  of  a  system  than  that?  And 
yet  that  heartless  domination  still  continues;  the  industrial  classes  have  not 
yet  been  fully  and  finally  emancipated;  aye  more,  at  this  time  we  are  more  bound 
to  the  money  grabbers  and  stock  exchanges  than  we  ever  were  before.  The 
industrial  classes  need  relief  today  as  much  as  they  ever  did,  although  the  man 
who  in  1878  spoke  the  words  which  I  have  quoted  has  turned  his  back  upon 
the  American  people  and  become  the  chief  agent  in  fastening  this  heartless 
domination  upon  the  American  people. 


THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS.  559 

Let  me  quote  one  more  great  man.  In  1888  Mr.  Harrison  was  elected 
President  of  the  United  States  upon  a  platform  which  contained  the  following 
words: 

The  Republican  party  is  in  favor  of  tlie  use  of  both  gold  and  silver  as  money  and 
condemns  the  policy  of  the  Democratic  administration  in  its  efforts  to  demonetize  silver. 

The  Republican  candidate  for  the  Presidency  was  elected  upon  that  platform 
which  condemns  -the  previous  administration  on  the  ground  that  it  had  at- 
tempted to  demonetize  silver;  the  second  administration  of  President  Clevelauvl 
was,  so  far  as  the  money  question  was  concerned,  infinitely  worse  than  the  first, 
and  yet  Mr.  Harrison,  who  was  elected  on  a  platform  denouncing  Mr.  Cleve- 
land's former  administration,  is  advocating  the  election  of  the  Republican  can- 
didate who  indorses  the  financial  policy  of  Mr.  Cleveland's  second  administra- 
tion. 

I  call  your  attention  to  these  things  that  you  may  understand  that  we  who 
advocate  bimetallism  are  advocating  what  others  have  advocated  in  the  past; 
when  we  tell  you  that  bimetallism  is  good  for  the  country  we  are  upon  ground 
which  has  been  trod  before.  The  Republican  convention  only  four  years  ago 
declared  in  its  national  platform  that  the  American  people  from  tradition  and' 
interest  were  in  favor  of  bimetallism.  What  has  changed?  Not  the  traditions 
of  the  country,  nor  the  interests  of  the  people,  nor  the  people  themselves.  The 
Republican  party  has  changed  and  has  deserted  bimetallism;  it  has  deserted 
the  people  and  now  seeks  to  fasten  upon  seventy  millions  of  freemen  the  yoke 
of  a  foreign  financial  despotism. 

Do  you  ask  me  what  drug  converts  Dr.  Jekyll  into  Mr.  Hyde?  Let  me 
suggest  an  explanation.  I  find  it  in  Mr.  Carlisle's  speech  of  1878.  He  said  in 
that  speech  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  would  coin  as  much  money  as  the 
law  would  permit  if  his  sympathies  were  with  the  "struggling  masses  who  pro- 
duce the  wealth  and  pay  the  taxes  of  the  country,"  but  he  prophesied  that 
instead  of  doing  so  he  would  coin  as  little  money  as  the  law  would  allow  be- 
cause his  sympathies,  instead  of  being  with  the  people,  were  with  the  "idle  hold- 
ers of  idle  capital."  Mr.  Carlisle's  criticism  was  addressed  to  Mr.  Sherman, 
who  was  then  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and  he  brings  against  Mr.  Sherman 
as  severe  an  indictment  as  one  public  man  can  bring  against  another.  My 
friends,  there  is  one  sin  which  no  public  man  confesses  to.  There  is  one  sin  so 
dark  and  deep  that  no  public  man  has  admitted  himself  guilty  of  it,  and  that  is 
the  sin  which  Mr.  Carlisle  laid  at  the  door  of  Senator  Sherman  when  he  said 
that  his  sympathies  were  with  the  "idle  holders  of  idle  capital"  instead  of  with 
the  "struggling  masses."  Mr.  Carlisle  was  right  in  his  explanation.  I  heard 
a  sermon  preached  many  years  ago  from  the  text:  As  a  man  thinketh  in  his 
heart,  so  is  he.  That  text  has  grown  upon  me.  Let  me  know  the  heart  of  a 
man  and  I  can  judge  what  he  will  do,  because  the  mind  constructs  reasons  to 
defend  what  the  heart  wants  to  do.  The-  sympathies  come  from  the  heart  and 
the  sympathies  of  public  men  control  their  conduct  just  as  Mr.  Carlisle  sug- 
gested that  the  sympathies  of  Mr.  Sherman  would  control  his  conduct.  Mr. 
Carlisle  said  that  because  Mr.  Sherman,  sympathized  with  the  "idle  holders  of 
idle  capita!"  he  would  coin  as  little  money  as  possible.  Why?  Because  the 
"idle  holders  of  idle  capital"  always  want  money  scarce  so  that  money  wi!!  be 
dear. 


560  THROUGH  THE  T\VO  PENINSULAS. 

Society  is  divided  on  the  money  question.  On  the  one  side  you  find  the 
capitalistic  classes  and  on  the  other  side  you  find  the  struggling  masses.  Do 
you  think  Carlisle  spoke  too  highly  of  the  struggling  masses?  No,  he  did  not. 
When  he  said  that  they  produce  the  wealth  and  pay  the  taxes  of  the  country 
he  told  the  truth.  In  time  of  peace  they  do  produce  the  wealth  and  pay  the 
taxes  of  the  country  and  in  time  of  war  they  are  the  only  people  who  are  will- 
ing to  save  their  country.  The  "idle  holders  of  idle  capital"  insist  upon  making 
the  laws  in  time  of  peace  while  the  "struggling  masses"  are  despised  and  spit 
upon.  But  in  time  of  war  the  "idle  holders  of  idle  capital"  appeal  to  the  "strug- 
gling masses"  to  offer  their  lives  in  defense  of  the  honor  of  their  country.  In 
this  campaign  what  pains  me  more  than  anything  else  is  to  find  the  common 
people,  who  are  always  the  most  law  abiding  people  of  the  community,  de- 
nounced as  anarchists  by  those  who  override  the  law,  defy  the  Government  an  J 
dispute  authority  with  Jehovah  himself. 

You  ask  me  what  has  caused  the  change  that  has  taken  place  in  so  many 
public  men?  I  will  tell  you.  It  is  not  a  change  of  head  but  a  change  of  heart. 
It  is  a  change  of  sj'mpathies  rather  than  a  change  of  opinion.  Have  you  not 
seen  a  person  poor,  and,  when  poor,  in  sympathy  with  those  about  him?  And 
have  you  not  seen  that  person  suddenly  rise  to  wealth  and  position  and  then 
forget  those  who  used  to  be  his  friends?  Have  you  not  seen  him  ashamed 
of  his  relatives?  Aye,  have  you  not  even  seen  such  a  one  turn  against  his  own 
mother?  It  is  because  the  heart  has  changed,  and  that,  too,  explains  the  change 
in  public  men.  They  go  from  home  as  the  representatives  of  the  people  but 
they  sometimes  mix  in  public  life  until  they  become  weaned  from  home.  I  am 
often  reminded  of  the  story  told  of  Ulysses  and  the  lotus  eaters.  When  the 
companions  of  Ulysses  came  to  the  land  of  the  lotus  and  ate  of  the  fruit  of  the 
tree,  they  forgot  their  home  and  native  land.  How  many  men  have  gone  into 
public  life,  earnestly  desiring  the  welfare  of  those  who  sent  them,  but  have 
eaten  of  the  deadly  lotus  until  they  have  forgotten  home  and  friends,  and  have 
turned  against  the  people  who  gave  them  their  start  in  life! 

We  can  support  bimetallism,  I  say,  by  appealing  to  authority  and  I  could 
continue  quotations  until  morning  from  the  highest  authorities  in  this  land. 
But  if  it  is  not  sufficient  to  prove  our  case  by  reason,  by  logic  and  by  author- 
ities, we  can  prove  it  by  analogy.  I  have  been  taught  to  believe  that  He  who 
was  infinite  in  power,  was  also  infinite  in  love.  He  never  gave  to  mankind  a 
need  without  giving  the  means  of  satisfying  it.  When  He  made  food  necessary 
to  human  existence,  He  gave  the  earth  with  its  bounties,  and  there  has  always 
been  enough  to  satisfy  the  hunger  of  man;  when  He  made  water  necessary  to 
human  existence  He  filled  the  earth  with  veins  and  planted  the  springs  along 
the  hillsides;  when  He  allowed  weariness  to  creep  over  the  limbs  of  the  toilers 
He  sent  sleep,  tired  nature's  sweet  restorer,  to  renew  their  strength;  when  He 
gave  to  mankind  a  mind  capable  oT  development  and  a  thirst  for  knowledge  He 
filled  the  universe  with  His  wonders  which  may  well  occupy  the  thoughts  of 
man;  and  when  He  fitted  man  for  society,  placed  him  among  his  fellows  and 
fashioned  the  channels  of  trade,  he  stored  away  in  the  secret  places  of  the 
mountains  the  gold  and  silver  suitable  for  money.  Mankind  found  these  pre- 
cious metals,  dragged  them  from  their  hiding  places  and  for  six  thousand  years 
they  have  come  down  to  us  side  by  side,  ministering  unto  the  wants  of  man. 


THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS.  561 

I  may  be  in  error;  if  I  am,  I  hope  I  may  be  led  into  the  better  way,  but  in  my 
humble  judgment,  the  man  who  would  rob  mankind  of  his  food  and  leave  his 
appetite;  who  would  corrupt  the  springs  from  which  he  drinks  and  yet  leave 
the  necessity  of  water;  who  would  rob  him  of  his  needed  rest  and  yet  allow 
weariness  to  come  again;  or  condemn  his  mind  to  ignorance  and  gloom  or 
superstition,  is  no  more  an  enemy  of  his  race  than  the  man  who,  knowing  what 
he  does,  but  deaf  to  the  entreaties  of  the  poor  and  blind  to  the  suffering  he 
would  cause,  would  strike  out  of  existence  one  of  the  precious  metals  given  by 
the  Almighty  Himself  to  meet  the  needs  of  man. 

At  Grand  Rapids  a  reception  was  given  Mrs.  Bryan  at  one  of  the 
hotels,  where  she  had  an  opportunity  to  meet  a  large  number  of  ladies. 
She  carried  away,  as  a  souvenir  of  the  occasion,  a  handsome  badge 
made  sixteen  parts  of  silver  and  one  of  gold. 

Friday  was  one  of  the  long  days.  In  order  that  the  reader  may 
know  how  much  work  can  be  crowded  into  one  campaign  day,  I  will 
mention  the  places  at  which  speeches  were  made  between  breakfast 
and  bedtime:  Muskegon,  Holland,  Fennville,  Bangor,  Hartford, 
Watervliet,  Benton  Harbor,  Niles,  Dowagiac,  Decatur,  Lawrence, 
Kalamazoo,  Battle  Creek,  Marshall,  Albion,  Jackson  (two  speeches), 
Leslie,  Mason,  and  Lansing  (six  speeches);  total  for  the  day,  25.  It 
was  near  midnight  when  the  last  one  was  finished.  At  Kalamazoo 
we  received  a  large  quantity  of  celery,  sufficient  to  supply  our  table  for 
several  days,  with  the  compliments  of  the  Hollanders.  One  of  the 
Lansing  meetings  was  attended  by  women  only. 

At  Marshall  Hon.  Albert  Williams,  of  Ionia,  Mich.,  was  billed  to 
follow  me,  and  my  speech  was  merely  an  introduction  of  him.    I  said : 

Marshall  Speech. 

My  friends,  I  am  not  going  to  have  time  to  talk  to  you,  but  I  simply  want  to 
make  a  little  speech  in  the  interest  of  a  famous  anarchist,  who  is  going  to 
speak  after  I  am  done.  Now  I  want  you  when  he  gets  up  to  talk  to  you,  to  take 
a  good  look  at  him.  He  is  a  typical  anarchist.  You  will  probably  see  his 
picture  in  Harper's  Weekly  next  week.  His  name  is  Hon.  Albert  Williams, 
and  he  lives  at  Ionia,  Mich.,  and  he  was  introduced  two  years  ago  at  Ionia  by 
Major  McKinley  as  the  only  survivor  of  the  sixteep  who  met  and  adopted  the 
first  Republican  platform  and  suggested  the  name  of  the  Republican  President 
on  July  6th,  1864,  under  the  oaks  at  Jackson.  He  must  be  an  anarchist,  because 
he  is  with  us  this  year.  My  friends,  he  is  one  of  the  many  men  who  have  found 
it  necessary  to  either  get  out  of  the  Republican  party  or  surrender  their  country 
into  the  hands  of  foreigners,  and  he  has  naturally  chosen  to  get  out  of  the  party. 
And  yet,  my  friends,  the  campaign  of  education  which  our  opponents  are  carry- 
ing on  consists  mainly  in  applying  abusive  names  to  such  men. 

Flint,  Bay  City,  and  Detroit  furnished  the  largest  crowds  en- 
countered Saturday.  Below  will  be  found  an  extract  from  the  Flint 
speech; 


562  THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENIHSULAS. 

Flint  Speech. 

My  attention  has  been  called  to  an  incident  which  occurred  in  this  town 
and  which  illustrates  how  well  the  farmer  understands  the  money  question  and 
how  ignorant  the  average  financier  often  is  on  the  subject.  One  of  your  bank- 
ers called  a  farmer  into  his  room  and  said  to  him,  "If  Bryan  is  elected  Presi- 
dent, I  shall  foreclose  the  mortgage  o;i  your  farm."  The  farmer  replied,  "If 
McKinley  is  elected  you  can  have  the  farm,  because  I  will  not  be  able  to  pay 
it,  but  if  Bryan  is  elected  you  cannot  foreclose  the  mortgage  because  under 
bimetallism  I  will  be  able  to  pay  it  oflF.*^  Who  understood  the  money  question, 
the  farmer  or  the  banker?  Our  opponents  spend  a  part  of  their  time  in  declar- 
ing that  bimetallism  will  give  us  cheap  dollars  and  then  occupy  the  rest  of  the 
time  telling  us  that  the  dollar  will  be  harder  to  secure  under  bimetallism  than 
it  is  now. 

Let  me  call  your  attention  to  a  local  interest.  This  is  a  great  city  for  the 
manufacture  of  wagons,  carriages  and  buggies.  I  want  to  ask  those  who  make 
carriages  to  think  for  a  moment  and  see  whether  they  sell  their  wagons  to 
financiers  or  to  farmers;  and  if  they  sell  their  wagons^ to  farmers,  I  want  them 
to  figure  out  how  a  farmer  can  buy  more  wagons  when  he  gets  less  for  his 
products.  I  want  those  who  sell  wagons  to  farmers  to  realize  that  their  pros- 
perity depends  upon  the  prosperity  of  the  farmer  who  buys  wagons,  and  not 
upon  the  prosperity  of  a  financier  who  charges  interest  on  the  money  loaned  to 
the  wagon  maker.  If  you  sell  buggies,  I  want  to  ask  you  whether  you  are  inter- 
ested in  selling  more  buggies  than  you  are  selling  now.  If  you  are,  remember 
that  you  can  only  sell  more  buggies  when  more  people  are  able  to  buy  bug- 
gies. When  you  lessen  the  number  of  people  who  can  buy  buggies,  you  lessen 
the  product  of  your  buggy  factories,  and  when  you  lessen  the  product  of  your 
buggy  factories  you  lessen  the  number  of  men  employed  in  making  buggies; 
and  when  less  men  are  employed  in  making  buggies,  your  storekeepers  have  less 
people  to  sell  goods  to. 

My  friends,  we  are  able  to  meet  the  arguments  of  our  opponents,  and  the 
best  evidence  that  they  have  lost  faith  in  their  cause,  in  the  logic  of  their  argu- 
ments and  the  justice  of  the  gold  standard,  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that 
instead  of  submitting  their  case  to  the  judgment  of  the  people,  they  have 
resorted  to  coercion  and  intimidation  in  order  to  secure  by  force  that  which 
they  cannot  secure  by  reason. 

Three  meetings  were  held  at  Detroit  in  the  evening,  the  first  in 
front  of  the  Cadillac,  the  second  in  the  Auditorium  and  the  third  on 
Campus  Martins,  and  all  were  very  large.  Below  will  be  found  an 
extract  from  the  Auditorium  speech: 

Detroit  Speech. 
The  money  question  is  the  paramount  issue  of  the  hour,  but  before  going 
into  a  discussion  of  that  question  I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  some  of  the 
things  which  have  been  said  by  our  opponents  in  regard  to  other  planks  of 
our  platform.  Having  been  defeated  in  the  discussion  of  the  main  issue  our 
opponents  now  seek  to  drag  in  other  questions  in  order  to  cover  up  their 
retreat.    The  so-called  sound  money  Democrats  say  that  their  consciences  will 


THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS  563 

not  permit  them  to  endorse  the  other  planks  of  the  platform.  I  want  these 
individuals  to  remember  that  this  agitation  of  other  questions  is  a  post  mortem 
agitation.  When  our  platform  was  presented  to  the  Democratic  National 
Convention,  the  minority  declared  in  their  report  that  the  money  question  was 
the  paramount  question.     Let  me  read: 

Upon  the  financial  question,  which  engages  at  this  time  the  chief  share  of  public 
attention,  the  views  of  the  majority  differ  so  fundamentally  from  what  the  minority  regard 
as  vital  as  Democratic  doctrine  as  to  demand  a  distinct  statement  of  what  they  hold  to  as 
the  only  just  and  true  expression  of  Democratic  faith  upon  this  paramount  issue. 

If  the  money  question  was  the  paramount  issue  then,  what  has  taken  place 
since  then  to  make  the  money  question  take  second  place?  Will  they  bring 
in  other  issues  which  they  did  not  think  of  then?  If  you  will  read  the  dis- 
cussion in  the  Chicago  convention  you  will  find  that  the  gold  standard 
advocates  did  not  then  think  that  our  platform  attacked  our  form  of  govern- 
ment or  endangered  the  safety  of  the  nation.  More  than  that,  they  had  time 
to  reflect  before  assembling  at  Indianapolis,  and  yet  they  there  adopted  a 
platform  making  money  again  the  paramount  issue.  I  submit,  then,  that 
within  three  weeks  of  election  is  top  late  to  discover  that  the  nation  is  in 
danger. 

There  is  a  fish,  which,  it  is  said,  efifects  its  escape  by  so  clouding  the  water 
that  it  cannot  be  seen,  and  in  this  campaign  the  gold  Democrat  is  engaged 
in  clouding  the  water,  while  he  gets  over  into  the  Republican  ranks.  There 
is  nothing  in  the  Chicago  platform  that  suggests  lawlessness  or  threatens  the 
safety  of  society.  There  is  nothing  in  the  platform  that  interferes  with  the 
right  of  any  man  to  life,  liberty  or  property.  There  is  nothing  in  that  plat- 
form that  menaces  the  welfare  of  the  man  who  expects  to  earn  his  living. 
The  only  people  whose  interests  are  menaced  by  that  platform  are  the  people 
who  expect  to  live  on  what  other  people  are  earning.  They  say  that  we 
criticise  the  Sui  reme  Court.  I  want  you  to  read  the  Democratic  platform 
on  that  subject  and  then  read  what  others  have  said,  and  see  whether  we  do 
not  fall  below,  rather  than  go  beyond,  what  is  proper  in  such  a  matter. 
What  we  said  of  the  Supreme  Court  is  weak,  compared  with  the  emphatic 
language  used  by  Abraham  Lincoln.  Lest  you  should  think  Abraham  Lin- 
coln old-fashioned,  let  me  read  the  language  of  a  living  Republican.  Lest  j'ou 
should  think  that  Abraham  Lincoln's  not  being  a  member  of  the  Supreme 
Court  should  have  no  weight,  let  me  read  you  the  language  of  a  Justice  of 
the  Supreme  Court,  who  ought  to  know  what  is  due  to  the  court.  Let  me 
read  you  these  words: 

While  I  have  no  doubt  that  Congress  will  find  some  means  of  surmounting  the  pres- 
ent crisis,  my  fear  Is  that,  in  some  moment  of  national  peril,  this  decision  will  rise  up  to 
frustrate  Its  will  and  paralyze  its  arm.  I  hope  it  may  not  prove  the  first  step  towards  the 
submergence  of  the  liberty  of  the  people  in  a  sordid  despotism  of  wealth.  As  I  cannot 
escape  the  conviction  that  the  decision  of  the  court  In  this  great  case  is  fraught  with 
immeasurable  danger  to  the  future  of  the  country,  and  that  it  approaches  the  proportions 
of  a  national  calamity,  I  feel  It  a  duty  to  enter  my  protest  against  it. 

What  anarchist  used  those  words?  Those  are  the  words  of  Justice 
Brown,  of  your  own  State.  If  Justice  Brown,  who  sat  upon  the  Supreme  bench 
and  took  part  in  the  consideration  of  that  very  case,  could  express  the  fear 
that  that  decision  might  be  the  first  step  toward  the  submergence  of  our  liberty 

S2 


564  THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS. 

in  despotism  of  wealth,  may  not  we,  as  private  citizens,  honestly  entertain  the 
same  fear?  If  Justice  Brown  thought  that  that  decision  was  fraught  with  im- 
measurable danger  to  the  future  of  the  country,  may  we  not  also  think  so? 
If -Justice  Brown  felt  so  deeply  upon  the  subject  that  he  spoke  of  the 
decision  as  approaching  the  proportions  of  a  national  calamity,  may  we  not 
speak  of  it  in  the  same  language?  Judges  are  human  beings,  and  if  you  find 
a  judge  who  thinks  he  is  not  human  you  will  find  him  the  most  human  of 
all  beings.  Judges  have  their  weaknesses  and  judges  have  made  mistakes. 
My  friends,  no  good  will  come  to  the  American  people  from  an  attempt  to 
shield  any  public  servant  from  the  honest  criticism  of  the  people  whom  he 
serves.  So  when  our  opponents  tell  us  that  we  are  reflecting  upon  the  Supreme 
Court,  we  can  plant  ourselves  upon  the  precedent  set  forth  in  history  and 
answer  the  charges  of  all  our  critics.  But  we  shall  not  stop  here.  When  did 
this  spasm  of  virtue  take  possession  of  the  Republican  party?  Ex-President 
Harrison  seems  to  be  deeply  touched  by  our  language  in  regard  to  the  Supreme 
Court.  And  yet  ex-President  Harrison  was  a  member  of  the  Republican 
party  when  that  party  reduced  the  number  of  judges  on  the  Supreme  bench 
in  order  to  prevent  Andrew  Johnson  from  appointing  any  judges,  and  then, 
when  he  went  out  of  office,  increased  the  number  of  judges  in  order  to  give 
another  Republican  President  a  chance  to  appoint  new  judges.  I  only  refer 
to  these  things  to  show  you  how  shallow,  how  baseless  and  how  hypocritical 
is  the  criticism  of  the  Democratic  platform  on  that  point. 

Well,  they  say  that  there  is  another  plank  that  they  think  is  dangerous.  And 
what  plank  is  it?  It  is  the  plank  that  declares  against  government  by  in- 
junction and  approves  of  a  bill  which  passed  the  Senate,  giving  a  trial  by  jury 
in  certain  contempt  cases.  Do  you  say  that  that  plank  is  wrong?  Then,  my 
friends,  if  our  plank  is  wrong  the  bill  which  we  approved  is  also  wrong,  and  yet 
when  that  bill  was  before  the  Senate  the  opposition  was  so  small  that  they  did 
not  even  call  the  roll  upon  its  passage.  That  is  the  bill  which  we  endorse;  that 
is  the. policy  set  forth  in  our  platform.  We  demand  that  this  bill  shall  be  passed, 
and  that  in  these  contempt  cases  a  man  charged  with  contempt  shall  be  given  a 
trial  by  jury  instead  of  a  trial  before  the  judge.  But,  my  friends,  proof  that 
that  plank  in  the  platform  is  sound  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  whenever  a 
man  goes  to  attack  it  he  does  it  by  indirection  instead  of  openly  opposing  the 
plank.  If  a  man  thinks  that  he  has  a  good  case,  he  states  the  case.  If  he 
fears  the  merits  of  the  case,  he  tries  to  win  the  same  by  underhand  means. 
Our  opponents  dare  not  condemn  that  plank,  because  the  right  of  trial  by  jury 
is  too  dear  to  the  American  people  to  permit  any  man  to  go  before  the  public 
and  condemn  a  bill  which  provides  such  a  trial. 

Now,  there  is  another  plank  which  they  object  to.  They  say  that  the 
Democratic  party  is  opposed  to  the  enforcement  of  law.  I  have  heard  men 
stand  before  the  public  and  accuse  the  Democratic  party  of  being  in  league 
with  lawlessness  and  of  being  unworthy  to  be  trusted  with  the  enforcement  of 
law.  My  friends,  if  the  platform  adopted  at  Chicago  is  endorsed  by  the  people, 
I  shall  be  the  one  to  occupy  the  executive  position  and  to  carry  out  that  plat- 
form. I  challenge  our  opponents  to  find  in  any  act  or  utterance  of  mine  a 
justification  of  the  charge  that,  if  elected,  I  will  not  enforce  the  laws  of  the 
United  States.     There  is  nothing  in  that  platform  that  declares  against  the  en- 


THROUGH  THE  TWO  PENINSULAS.  565 

forcement  of  the  laws  of  the  United  States.  Our  platform  simply  declares 
against  invasion  of  a  State  in  matters  of  local  concern,  and  in  that  we  stand 
upon  the  Constitution,  and  no  man  should  be  President  and  swear  to  support 
the  Constitution  unless  he  is  prepared  to  support  it  all.  I  repeat,  therefore, 
what  I  have  said  time  and  again,  that  I,  who  stand  upon  that  platform,  I,  who 
am  to  be  elected  if  the  platform  is  ratified  at  the  polls,  intend  to  and  will 
enforce  every  law  of  the  United  States.  But  the  trouble  is,  my  friends,  that  they 
do  not  fear  a  failure  to  enforce  the  law.  What  they  fear  is  that  I  will  have  an 
Attorney  General,  if  I  am  elected,  who  will  enforce  the  law  against  the  big 
violators.  Show  me  a  man  who  has  profited  by  violating  the  law,  and  I  will 
show  you  a  man  who  will  tell  you  that  he  is  afraid  I  will  not  enforce  the  law. 
In  this  campaign  I  have  arrayed  against  me  all  of  the  big  law  breakers  in 
th?  United  States.  This  country  is  not  in  danger  from  the  small  law  breakers; 
they  are  generally  punished.  It  is  the  men  who  think  that  they  are  greater  than 
the  Government  who  menace  our  institutions.  It  is  the  coal  trust  that  is 
afraid  that  I  won't  enforce  the  law,  and  the  sugar  trust  and  the  Standard  Oil 
trust,  and  all  this  brood  of  trusts  that  have  violated  the  law  and  trampled 
upon  individual  rights  with  impunity.  They  know  that  the  success  of  the  Chi- 
cago platform  means  that  their  preying  upon  the  public  will  forever  cease.  I 
repeat  what  I  have  said  before,  that,  if  elected,  I  shall  use  all  the  authority 
of  the  executive  to  enforce  the  laws  which  now  exist  against  every  trust  in  this 
country.  But  I  shall  not  stop  there.  If  the  laws  now  in  existence  are  not  suffi- 
cient, I  will  recommend  laws  which  are  sufficient,  and  if  the  Supreme  Court  de- 
cides that  the  Federal  Constitution  prohibits  the  passage  or  enforcement  of 
any  law  interfering  with  a  trust,  I  will  recommend  an  amendment  to  the  Con- 
stitution which  will  permit  the  American  people  to  live  in  spite  of  trusts.  And 
more  than  that,  if  I  have  a  Supreme  judge  to  appoint  and  there  are  two  men 
presented,  one  opposed  to  trusts  and  the  other  in  favor  of  them,  I  will  appoint 
the  judge  who  is  opposed  to  trusts. 

Mr.  Joseph  S.  Hall,  of  Detroit,  was  the  superintendent  of  our  train 
during  the  trip  through  Michigan,  and  so  well  did  he  do  his  work  that 
during  the  four  days  we  ran  practically  on  time.  The  entire  party 
felt  indebted  to  him  and  to  Mr.  Campau.  The  trip  through  Michigan 
was  enlivened  by  the  presence  of  a  number  of  persons  who  visited  with 
us  from  time  to  time,  among  whom  may  be  mentioned  Mr.  and  Mrs. 
Wellington  R.  Burt,  he  being  one  of  the  few  railroad  presidents  of 
the  United  States  who  openly  advocated  free  coinage. 

Sunday  morning  we  attended  Westminster  Presbyterian  Church 
and  listened  to  a  sermon  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Patterson.  In  the  evening 
I  went  with  Col.  R.  G.  Butler  and  made  my  only  Sunday  speech— a 
talk  before  the  Newsboys'  Association,  a  society  in  which  Col.  Butler 
was  deeply  interested. 


CHAPTER  XLV. 


M 


AMONG  THE  BUCKEYES  AND  HOOSIERS. 

ONDAY,  October  19,  and  the  day  following  were  spent  in 
Ohio.  Starting  from  Detroit  in  the  night,  we  reached  To- 
ledo about  breakfast  time  and  put  in  a  long  and  busy  day, 
meetings  being  held  at  a  number  of  cities,  prominent  among  which 
were  Lima,  Sidney,  Piqua,  Troy,  Hamilton,  Dayton,  Xenia,  Wash- 
ington, Circleville,  Lancaster  and  Zanesville,  At  Lima  I  referred  to 
the  request  just  made  by  the  chairman  of  the  Republican  National 
Committee — that  the  flag  be  displayed  by  those  who  believed  in  sound 
money.     Below  will  be  found  a  portion  of  my  remarks : 

Lima  Speech. 

I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  something  that  appeared  in  yesterday 
morning's  paper.  I  find  that  the  chairman  of  the  Republican  National  Com- 
mittee has  issued  a  letter  to  the  American  people  in  which  he  says: 

The  American  flag  has  been  in  the  present  campaign  the  emblem  or  insignia  of 
national  honor.  Its  influence  has  been  great  for  good  in  the  cause  of  a  good  people.  Its  dis- 
play in  many  places  has  been  potent  in  the  advancement  of  the  country's  battle  for  the 
maintenance  of  its  honor  at  home  and  abroad.  I  therefore  suggest  that  on  Saturday, 
October  31,  all  who  intend  to  vote  on  November  3  for  the  preservation  of  our  nation's 
honor,  for  sound  money  and  the  advancement  of  our  people's  interests  and  general  pros- 
perity, display  the  national  colors  at  their  homes,  their  places  of  business,  or  wherever 
they  may  be  seen,  in  order  that  voters,  whose  hearts  are  for  their  country,  may  be 
strengthened  in  their  purpose,  and  those  who  are  undetermined  may  the  more  patriotically 
and  intelligently  conclude  how  "best  to  perform  their  duty  as  citizens. 

My  friends,  it  is  the  first  time,  I  believe,  that  I  have  ever  agreed  with  the 
chairman  of  the  Republican  National  Committee,  but  I  want  to  sign  my  name  to 
his  letter  and  ask  all  those  who  believe  in  ideas  set  forth  there  to  display 
the  flag  on  the  31st  of  October,  because  there  is  not  a  thing  in  that  letter  that 
the  advocates  of  free  silver  cannot  indorse. 

Now,  note  what  he  says — that  he  wants  the  flag  displayed  by  all  those 
who  on  the  3d  of  November  intend  to  vote  for  the  preservation  of  our 
national  honor.  We  advocates  of  free  silver  believe  that  only  by  having  a 
financial  policy  made  by  the  American  people  for  the  American  people  can  we 
support  the  honor  of  the  United  States.  He  wants  those  to  display  the  flag 
who  are  for  sound  money.  We  who  believe  in  the  money  of  the  Consti- 
tution are  for  a  sounder  money  than  those  who  want  to  change  our  currency 
into  pounds,  shillings  and  pence.     We  who  believe  in  a  basis  for  our  finan- 

566 


AMONG  THE  BUCKEYES  AND  HOOSIERS.  567 

cial  transactions  sufficiently  broad  for  those  transactions  to  rest  upon,  be- 
lieve in  a  sounder  financial  system  than  those  who  advocate  a  gold  standard 
and  a  financial  system  based  upon  gold  alone,  when  they  cannot  find  the 
gold  to  furnish  the  foundation. 

We  not  only  believe  in  sounder  money,  but  we  tell  you  what  we  mean  by 
sound  money,  and  do  not  play  the  hypocrite  by  talking  about  sound  money 
and  then  refusing  to  explain  what  the  term  means. 

He  wants  those  who  are  going  to  vote  for  the  advancement  of  our  people's 
interests  and  general  prosperity  to  display  the  flag.  My  friends,  we  believe 
that  free  coinage  of  silver,  the  opening  of  the  mints  to  the  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  silver  at  i6  to  i  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent  of  any 
other  nation,  means  the  advancement  of  the  interests  of  the  people  and 
general  prosperity,  and  therefore  we  can  join  in  displaying  the  American  flag. 
Let  it  be  known  to  the  country  that  we  are  standing  by  the  flag,  and  that 
we  are  not  asking  foreign  nations  what  that  flag  shall  mean. 

I  join,  therefore,  in  the  request  for  three  reasons:  First,  because  we 
believe  in  everything  he  advocates  in  that  letter,  and  therefore  have  as  much 
right  to  display  the  flag  on  that  day  as  any  Republican  has,  and  we  believe  that 
we  have  a  good  deal  more  moral  right  to  do  so  in  this  campaign. 

I  join  in  the  request  for  another  reason.  I  do  not  want  them  to  mark 
the  advocates  of  free  silver  for  slaughter  on  that  day.  I  do  not  want  the 
employers  to  go  about  over  your  town  and  throughout  the  country  and  find 
out  who  has  a  bag  in  his  window  and  then  threaten  to  discharge  the  man 
who  does  not  say  that  he  is  going  to  vote  the  Republican  ticket. 

My  friends,  if  coercion  is  going  to  be  attempted,  for  heaven's  sake  let  it 
not  be  attempted  by  using  the  flag  as  a  means  of  pointing  out  the  men  to 
be  threatened.  If  they  want  to  find  out  who  should  be  slaughtered,  let  them 
take  some  other  emblem  than  the  nation's  flag  under  which  to  do  their 
nefarious  work. 

There  is  another  reason  why  I  join  in  that  request.  I  want  some  flags  to 
float  on  that  day  which  do  not  mean  a  government  by  syndicates  and  for  syn- 
dicates. I  want  some  flags  to  float  on  that  day  which  do  not  stand  for  the  right 
of  a  coal  trust  to  send  a  representative  to  every  fireside  and  collect  tribute  from 
every  family  in  this  land.  I  want  some  flags  to  float  on  that  day  that  do  not  stand 
for  the  opinions  of  those  who  say  that  if  the  majority  of  the  people  win  in  this 
campaign  they  do  not  know  whether  they  will  submit  to  the  decision  or  not. 
I  want  some  flags  to  float  on  that  day  which  have  behind  them  the  honest 
sentiment  of  the  American  people;  of  people  who  expect  to  attend  to  their 
own  business,  and  do  not  intend  to  be  bought  or  driven  in  to  the  support  of 
foreign   financial  policies. 

So,  my  friends,  I  want  to  ask  all  advocates  of  silver  to  bring  out  the 
flag  on  that  day.  I  want  them  to  display  it  in  their  homes  and  places  of  busi- 
ness and,  if  need  be,  carry  it  upon  the  streets.  Let  our  opponents  know  that  we 
do  not  intend  to  surrender  that  emblem  into  the  hands  of  the  enemies  of  the 
people  of  this  country. 

At  Hamilton  ex-Governor  James  E.  Campbell  presided;  at  Dayton 
I  received  a  small  silver-plated  cannon,  which  is  treasured  among  the 


568  AMONG  THE  BUCKEYES  AND  HOOSIERS. 

souvenirs  of  the  campaign.  We  closed  the  meetings  of  the  day  at 
Zanesville,  where  I  addressed  three  audiences  between  12:30  and  2 
o'clock  A.  M. 

We  went  to  Bellaire  in  the  night  and  Tuesday  proceeded  north 
along  the  Ohio  River,  stopping,  among  other  places  at  Steubenville, 
East  Liverpool,  Rochester,  Penn,  Youngstown,  Alliance,  Ravenna, 
Akron,  Medina,  Elyria,  Sandusky  and  Tiffin.  At  East  Liverpool  we 
met  ex-Congressman  Ikert  and  his  wife,  who  remained  with  us  during 
most  of  the  day. 

The  largest  crowd  was  probably  at  Youngstown.  The  Sandusky 
meeting  was  held  after  midnight. 

Our  train  was  delayed  somewhat  in  leaving  Sandusky,  and  as  I  was 
trying  to  snatch  a  little  sleep  between  meetings,  my  dreams  were  dis- 
turbed by  such  dialogues  as  the  following: 

"Bryan!  Bryan!  Get  up!  Let  us  see  you!  You  will  lose  a  hun- 
dred votes  if  you  don't." 

"No,  Jim,  make  it  fifty." 

The  day's  campaign  closed  with  the  Tiffin  meeting,  at  which  I 
spoke  between  the  hours  of  i  and  2  A.  M. 

Traveling  by  night  we  reached  Greenville,  and  held  an  early 
morning  meeting  there — the  last  of  the  Ohio  meetings. 

At  this  place  I  met  a  number  of  acquaintances,  it  being  the  place 
where  I  delivered  my  first  lecture  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Fifty- 
Third  Congress. 

The  tour  through  Ohio  had  been  so  managed  as  to  carry  me  into 
nearly  all  of  the  Congressional  districts.  Hon.  D.  McCanville,  who 
was  in  charge  of  the  Speaker's  Bureau  of  the  National  Committee, 
was  in  charge  of  the  party  and  was  assisted  by  Chairman  Durbin,  both 
of  whom  were  untiring  in  their  efforts  to  add  to  the  comfort  of  the 
party.  In  going  from  place  to  place  we  met  most  of  the  prominent 
Democrats,  Populists  and  silver  Republicans.  From  Ohio  on  the  yel- 
low ribbons  were  conspicuous  at  nearly  every  meeting.  They  were 
generally  distributed  free  on  the  morning  of  our  meeting,  as  we  learned, 
but  as  a  rule  those  who  wore  them  were  orderly  and  made  no  attempt 
to  interfere  with  or  disturb  meetings. 

From  Greenville  we  crossed  over  into  Indiana  and  spent  two 
days  in  that  State.  Beginning  at  Richmond,  we  made  short  stops 
at  Rushville,  Newcastle,  Muncie,  Anderson,  Marion,  Bluflfton  and 
Ft.  Wayne.  Next  to  Ft.  Wayne,  the  Anderson  meeting  was  the 
largest.       At  that  place  there  were  a  large  number  of  college  stu- 


AMONG  THE  BUCKEYES  AND  HOOSIERS  569 

dents  present  from  Prof.  Groan's  Normal  School.  There  were 
three  meetings  at  Ft.  Wayne,  the  first  outdoors,  and  the  others  in  large 
halls.  The  principal  speech  was  made  at  the  second  meeting,  and  here, 
as  on  several  other  occasions,  I  commended  the  work  done  by  Senator 
Teller,  Senator  Dubois,  Congressman  Towne,  and  others  who  had 
left  the  Republican  party  and  openly  joined  with  us  during  the  cam- 
paign. 

Friday  found  us  visiting  a  large  number  of  cities,  among  which 
may  be  named  Decatur,  Huntington,  Rochester,  Peru,  Logansport, 
Delphi,  Frankfort,  La  Fayette,  Crawfordsville,  Greencastle,  Brazil 
and  Terre  Haute.  A  photograph  taken  at  Rochester  gives  such  a 
good  view  of  the  crowd  that  I  thought  it  worthy  of  reproduction.  It 
will  be  found  on  another  page. 

A  very  large  crowd  was  assembled  at  La  Fayette,  where  I  spoke 
from  three  sides  of  the  court  house. 

At  Greencastle  I  met  Hon.  John  Clark  Ridpath,  the  fusion  candi- 
date for  Congress.  Mr.  Ridpath  has  written  some  very  severe  criti- 
cisms of  the  gold  standard,  and  is  so  distinguished  a  scholar  that  his 
words  carry  great  weight. 

The  Brazil  meeting  was  both  large  and  enthusiastic.  We  ended 
our  campaign  in  Indiana  at  Terre  Haute,  where  two  large  outdoor 
meetings  were  held.  The  arrangements  here  were  excellent,  the 
Democratic  clubs  marching  as  an  escort  and  opening  the  way. 

During  this  trip  through  Indiana  Governor  Matthews  and  Mr. 
Martin  were  with  us.  I  cannot  too  emphatically  express  my  apprecia- 
tion of  their  zeal  for,  and  fidelity  to,  the  cause. 


CHAPTER   XLVI. 


IN  THE  SUCKER  STATE. 

THE  first  Illinois  meeting  was  held  at  Danville,  where  I  quoted 
Congressman  Joseph  Cannon  in  opposition  to  the  gold  stand- 
ard. Returning  to  Paris,  we  made  a  brief  stop  there  and  then 
went  on  through  Charleston,  Mattoon  and  Sullivan,  to  Decatur,  where 
two  meetings  were  held.  Here  the  Reception  Committee  took  us 
through  the  streets  in  a  motor-cycle. 

The  next  stop  was  at  Springfield,  where  an  immense  crowd  had 
assembled.  There  were  two  meetings  here,  one  in  the  Court  House 
Square,  and  one  in  the  Capitol  grounds.  Springfield  plays,  in  my 
judgment,  an  important  part  in  the  contest  which  is  being  waged  for 
the  restoration  of  the  money  of  the  Constitution.  The  Illinois  conven- 
tion of  June,  1895,  exerted  a  potent  influence  in  the  struggle  for 
supremacy  in  the  Democratic  National  Convention. 

Passing  through  Petersburg,  Havana  and  Pekin,  we  closed  the 
first  day  in  Peoria.  This  was  the  next  day  after  Mr.  Carlisle  had  been 
egged  at  Covington,  and  at  Peoria  I  mentioned  the  matter,  and  said: 

Peoria  Speech. 

I  want  to  say  that  I  condemn  the  disturbance  at  Mr.  Carlisle's  meeting  as 
much  as  any  disturbance  offered  at  any  silver  meeting.  Let  each  individual  re- 
member that  no  disgrace  can  be  heaped  by  him  upon  any  other  person.  A  man 
cannot  be  disgraced  by  another.  The  man  disgraces  himself  when  disgrace 
comes,  and  those  who  attempt  to  offer  indignity  to  another  injure  themselves 
far  more  than  they  do  the  object  of  their  attacks. 

I  know  that  in  this  campaign  there  has  been  resentment  toward  many  who 
in  the  past  advocated  one  doctrine,  but  who  now  advocate  another  doctrine.  I 
know  that  these  changes  may  have  been  made  without  sufHcient  reason  or  ex- 
cuse being  given  to  the  public,  but,  my  friends,  leave  these  men  to  history. 
History  is  just;  if  they  have  done  wrong,  they  shall  be  punished.  If  they  are 
right,  we  should  not  punish  them. 

We  met  a  number  of  prominent  silver  advocates  that  day,  among 
them  ex-Congressman  McNeeley,  of  Petersburg,  Postmaster  Ridgely, 
of  Springfield,  and  Editor  Barnes  of  the  Peoria  Journal,  who  was,  until 
after  the  St.  Louis  convention,  a  Republican. 

During  the  night  we  went  to  Ottawa  and  began  Saturday's  work 

570 


IN  THE  SUCKER  STATE.  571 

at  that  place.  At  La  Salle,  I  replied  to  some  criticisms  directed 
against  me  by  ex-President  Harrison  and  Mr,  Ingalls,  president  of  the 
Big  Four  railway  system.     My  remarks  will  be  found  below: 

La  Salle  Speech. 

Two  distinguished  men  have  called  me  to  account  because  of  advice  which 
I  gave  to  railroad  employes.  In  speaking  of  the  attempt  of  the  railroads  to 
coerce  their  employes  I  said  that  in  these,  hard  times,  when  employment  is  so 
difficult  to  find,  I  did  not  want  to  advise  laboring  men  to  do  anything  which 
would  lose  them  their  employment,  and  added  that  they  should  wear  Republican 
buttons  if  necessary,  march  in  Republican  parades  if  they  were  commanded  to 
do  so,  and  even  contribute  to  the  Republican  campaign  fund  if  that  was  re- 
quired by  their  employers,  but  that  they  should  vote  according  to  their  con- 
victions on  election  day.  Mr.  Ingalls,  the  president  of  a  railroad,  in  a  speech 
at  Cincinnati  denounced  me  for  advising  employes  to  deceive  their  employers, 
and  ex-President  Harrison  has  charged  me  with  teaching  immorality  in  giving 
the  advice  which  I  have  quoted. 

Now,  I  desire  to  justify  my  position.  The  right  to  vote  according  to  one's 
conscience  is  a  law-given  right.  Coercion  is  a  violation  of  law,  and  when  I 
advise  employes  to  vote  as  they  please,  even  though  they  must  wear  Republican 
buttons  and  march  in  Republican  parades,  I  am  taking  higher  moral  ground  and 
giving  more  patriotic  advice  than  those  who  countenance  coercion  and  appeal 
to  employes  to  vote  the  Republican  ticket  on  election  day  merely  because  they 
have  been  compelled  to  wear  Republican  badges  during  the  campaign. 

When  a  man  criticises  me  for  advising  employes  to  express  their  honest 
convictions  at  the  ballot  box,  I  ask  what  such  people  think  of  the  Australian 
ballot.  The  Australian  ballot  is  a  secret  ballot  and  we  have  adopted  it  in  this 
country  in  order  to  protect  American  citizens  in  the  right  to  vote  according  to 
conscience  without  being  subjected  to  discharge  or  persecution.  When  Mr. 
Harrison  and  Mr.  Ingalls  condemn  me  for  telling  employes  to  vote  as  they 
please  they  virtually  condemn  the  Australian  ballot;  in  fact,  they  condemn  all 
secret  ballots  and  tell  the  citizen  he  ought  to  announce  in  advance  how  he  is 
going  to  vote. 

There  are  some  who  can  announce  their  position  in  advance,  and  when  a 
citizen  is  in  a  position  to  act  with  independence  I  am  glad  to  see  him  do  so; 
but  when  an  employer  violates  the  rights  of  his  employes  by  demanding  that 
they  march  in  parades  or  wear  certain  badges,  the  employe  has  a  right  to  take 
advantage  of  the  secret  ballot.  I  am  willing  to  let  the  public  sit  in  judgment 
upon  the  advice  which  I  have  given  to  employes  if  Mr.  Ingalls  and  Mr.  Harri- 
son are  willing  to  submit  their  advice  to  the  public. 

We  found  a  large  crowd  assembled  at — I  was  about  to  say  Mr. 
Ladd's  town— the  name  of  Hon.  C.  K.  Ladd  being  in  my  mind  so 
closely  connected  with  Kewanee. 

Rock  Island  and  Moline  arranged  for  a  joint  meeting  at  the  half- 
way point  between  the  two  cities.     Vice-President  Stevenson  spoke 


572  IN  THE  SUCKER  STATE. 

here  with  me,  and  then  went  with  us  to  Quincy  and  spoke  there  that 
night. 

At  Monmouth  the  ladies  had  charge  of  the  meeting,  which  was 
held  at  the  Fair  grounds.  The  morning  papers  of  the  previous  day  had 
published  an  interview  with  Bishop  Worthington,  of  Omaha,  and  at 
the  Monmouth  meeting  I  referred  to  his  sentiments,  using  the  follow- 
ing language: 

MonmoutH   Speech. 

I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  an  interview  which  appears  in  a  Chicago 
paper  of  yesterday.  It  is  a  dispatch  from  New  York  giving  an  interview  with 
Bishop  Worthington  of  Omaha.  When  it  was  suggested  to  the  Bishop  that  the 
farmers  throughout  the  country  were  not  in  as  prosperous  a  condition  as  they 
had  been  in  the  past,  Bishop  Worthington  said: 

The  trouble  with  the  farmer,  in  my  judgment,  Is  that  we  have  carried  our  free 
educational  system  too  far.  The  farmers'  sons,  a  great  many  of  them,  who  have  abso- 
lutely no  ability  to  rise,  get  a  taste  of  education  and  follow  it  up.  They  will  never 
amount  to  anything,  that  is,  many  of  them,  and  they  become  disqualified  to  follow  in 
the  walk  of  life  that  God  intended  they  should,  and  drift  Into  the  cities.  It  is  over- 
education  of  those  who  are  not  qualified  to  receive  it  that  fills  our  cities  while  the  farms 
lie  idle. 

I  hope  it  may  prove  that  those  words  were  not  uttered  by  Bishop  Worth- 
ington, because  I  hate  to  think  that  any  man  used  words  like  those  that  I 
have  read.  To  talk  about  the  over-education  of  our  farmers'  sons  and  to 
attribute  the  difficulties  which  surround  us  today  to  that  is,  to  my  mind,  one 
of  the  most  cruel  things  that  a  man  ever  uttered.  The  idea  of  saying  that  there 
is  over-education  among  our  farmers'  sons!  Do  you  know  what  that  language 
means?  It  means  a  reversal  of  the  progress  of  civilization  and  a  march  towards 
the  dark  ages  again.  Now,  can  you  tell  me  which  one  of  the  farmers'  sons  is 
going  to  prove  a  great  man  until  you  have  educated  them  all?  Are  we  to  select 
a  commission  to  go  around  and  pick  out  the  ones  who  are  to  be  educated? 

Ah!  my  friends,  there  is  another  reason  why  people  have  gone  into  the 
citites  and  left  the  farms.  It  is  because  your  legislation  has  been  causing  the 
foreclosure  of  mortgages  upon  the  farms.  It  is  because  your  legislation  has 
been  making  the  farmer's  life  harder  all  the  time;  it  is  because  the  non-pro- 
ducinjj  class  have  been  producing  the  laws.  The  idea  of  laying  the  blame  of 
the  present  distress  to  the  farmer's  door!  The  idea  of  suggesting  as  a  remedy 
the  closing  of  schools  in  order  that  the  pupil  may  not  become  dissatisfied!  Why, 
my  friends,  there  will  be  dissatisfaction  while  the  cause  for  dissatisfaction  exists. 
Instead  of  attempting  to  prevent  people  realizing  their  position,  why  don't 
they  try  to  improve  the  condition  of  the  farmers  of  this  country?  I  cannot 
understand  how  a  man  living  upon  a  farm  can  be  deluded  with  the  idea  that 
the  gold  standard  has  anything  but  misery  and  suffering  for  him.  Haven't  you 
independence  enough  to  leave  your  party  in  order  to  save  your  homes  and  your 
families  from  the  gold  standard? 

Politics  is  a  matter  of  business,  but  there  are  times  when  politics  involves 
more  than  business,  and  in  this  campaign,  when  we  are  to  determine  the  finan- 
cial policy  of  the  nation  for  four  years  at  least,  and  may  be  for  a  longer  time, 
this  question  rises  beyond  the  plane  of  a  mere  business  question.    This  question 


IN  THE  SUCKER  ^TATE.  573 

involves  the  welfare  of  our  nation,  it  involves  humanity,  it  involves  civilization, 
because,  mark  my  words,  if  the  gold  standard  goes  on  and  people  continue 
to  complain,  the  gold  standard  advocates,  instead  of  trying  to  improve  the  con- 
dition of  the  people,  will  be  recommending  that  you  close  your  schools  so  that 
the  people  will  not  realize  how  much  they  are  suffering. 

Is  it  not  strange  that  there  can  be  anybody  in  this  country  so  far  removed 
from  the  masses  of  the  people  as  to  think  that  the  masses  of  the  people  are 
being  well  cared  for?  No,  it  is  not  strange;  it  is  as  old  as  history.  In  all 
times,  in  all  countries  and  under  all  conditions,  those  who  are  getting  along  well 
enough,  as  a  rule,  do  not  feel  for  those  who  are  suffering,  and,  therefore,  the 
well-to-do  never  reform  an  evil  or  bring  relief  from  a  bad  condition. 

I  want  you  to  remember  this,  that  you  cannot  find  in  all  the  history  of 
the  past  a  single  instance  where  people  who  profited  by  bad  laws  ever  secured 
their  repeal.  You  cannot  find  an  instance  where  the  people  who  have  profited 
by  a  bad  system  ever  secured  a  change  of  the  system.  Bad  laws  must  be 
reformed  by  those  who  have  suffered.  Bad  systems  must  be  changed  by  those 
who  have  been  suffering  from  them.  I  appeal  to  you  who  have  felt  the  severity 
of  a  gold  standard  to  achieve  your  own  relief,  because  you  have  the  means  in 
your  power.    The  opportunity  will  be  presented  at  the  ballot  box. 

At  Monmouth  I  met  Felix  Regnier,  Esq.,  who  was  the  first  mem- 
ber of  the  IlHnois  delegation  to  cast  a  vote  for  me  at  Chicago. 

There  were  large  meetings  at  Bushnell  and  Macomb,  and  three 
meetings  at  Quincy. 

The  trip  to  Jacksonville  was  made  during  the  night.  We  had 
arranged  to  spend  the  Sabbath  in  the  latter  city  so  that  we  could  rest 
among  the  friends  we  knew  when  that  was  our  home.  We 
stopped  with  Dr.  H.  K.  Jones,  and  in  company  with  some 
friends  listened  to  a  sermon  by  Rev.  A.  B.  Morey,  pastor  of  the 
First  Presbyterian  Church,  for  several  years  our  church  home.  Our 
enjoyment  of  the  occasion  was  somewhat  marred  by  the  fact  that 
several  of  the  prominent  members  of  the  church  decorated  themselves 
with  the  yellow  ribbon  worn  by  the  Republicans  during  closing  days 
of  the  campaign.  We  had  attended  church  in  many  places  and  this 
was  the  first  time  we  had  seen  the  political  colors  worn  on  Sunday. 

By  invitation  of  Dr.  John  E.  Bradley,  president,  I  visited  my  Alma 

Mater,  Illinois  College,  and  spoke  to  the  students.     The  members  of 

Sigma  Pi,  the  society  to  which  I  belonged,  formed  in  line  on  either 

side  of  the  walk,  and  sang  their  society  song  as  we  passed  from  the 

building  to  our  carriage.     My  remarks  on  this  occasion  will  be  found 

below : 

Jacksonville  Speech — At  Illinois  College. 

Mr.  President  and  Students:  A  man  who  forgets  his  mother  loses  the 
respect  of  all  good  people,  and  so  a  man  who  leaves  college  and  forgets  his 
Alma  Mater  can  hardly  expect  to  stand  high  in  public  esteem,    It  always 


574  IN  THE  SUCKER  STATE. 

gives  me  great  pleasure  to  come  back  to  Illinois  College,  because  I  remember 
the  days  which  I  spent,  two  years  in  Whipple  Academy,  and  four  years  in 
college,  as  among  not  only  the  most  pleasant  days  of  my  life,  but  as  among  the 
most  profitable  days  of  my  life. 

I  am  always  pleased  to  speak  to  college  students,  but  it  gives  me  special 
pleasure  to  speak  to  the  students  of  this  college.  While  a  man  in  public  life 
must  expect  to  have  his  motives  questioned  and  his  purpose  misunderstood, 
yet  I  hope  that  you  will  believe  me  when  I  tell  you  that  my  study  of  economic 
questions  has  been  with  the  single  desire  to  find  out  what  solution  is  best  for 
the   majority   of  the   people. 

We  have  differences  of  opinion  and  it  is  proper  that  there  should  be 
charity  shown  toward  each  other,  because  none  of  us,  you  know,  are  infallible. 
We  are  all  apt  to  make  mistakes,  but  I  believe  that  those  who  most  desire  to 
ascertain  the  truth  and  labor  hardest  to  find  out  what  is  best  will  come  nearest 
to  arriving  at  a  just  conclusion.  No  one  who  desires  to  know  the  truth  ever 
objects  to  hearing  from  one  who  differs  from  him.  Truth  does  not  grow  in 
seclusion;  it  comes  from  the  clash  of  ideas,  from  the  comparison  of  views. 
Error  is  the  only  thing  that  fears  discussion.  Truth  has  a  power  within  by 
which  it  propagates  itself;  and,  after  all,  there  is  nothing  omnipotent  but  truth. 
While  we  differ  here  as  young  men  upon  the  various  questions  which  arise, 
I  know  that  you  will  agree  with  me  when  I  say  that  in  the  long  run  that  policy 
is  going  to  be  adopted  which  proves  to  be  the  best,  and  that  those  who  attach 
themselves  to  a  righteous  cause  are  sure  to  triumph  at  last.  I  never  speak 
to  young  men  without  feeling  that  I  ought  to  impress  upon  them  a  lesson  which 
has  been  impressed  upon  me,  namely,  that  when  a  man  believes  that  he  is 
right  he  can  afford  to  stand  alone,  and  that  he  can  afford  to  called  anything — 
because  a  man's  character  is  not  determined  by  what  people  call  him. 

I  remember  that  it  was  here,  as  a  young  man,  that  I  began  the  study  of 
political  economy,  and  it  was  under  that  great  leader  whom  we  had  in  this 
college  for  so  many  years.  Dr.  Sturtevant,  that  I  first  became  interested  in 
the  great  public  question  of  that  day.  I  remember  his  teachings  as  I  listened 
to  him,  at  that  time,  and  for  many  years  I  could  find  no  better  arguments 
in  the  discussion  of  the  question  then  before  the  public  than  his  book  presented. 
And  when  another  great  question  came  before  the  people  and  began  to  engage 
public  thought,  I  wondered  whether  he  had  covered  that  question  in  his  book, 
and  whether  his  great  mind  had  applied  itself  to  the  fundamental  principles 
which  underlie  the  question  which  now  so  arouses  the  thoughts  of  people. 

When  I  began  to  examine  I  found  that  in  tliat  book — I  do  not  know 
whether  you  use  it  now  or  not,  but  you  did  when  I  was  in  college — "Economics, 
or  the  Science  of  Wealth,"  I  found,  I  say,  that  in  that  book  he  had  stated 
the  great  fundamental  principle  which  underlies  the  money  question.  Now, 
in  this  campaign  we  are  trying  to  find  out  what  is  the  best  kind  of  money. 
Some  say  that  one  kind  of  standard  will  give  the  best  kind  of  dollar;  others 
say  that  another  kind  of  standard  will  give  the  best  kind  of  dollar.  You  must 
have  something  by  which  you  can  judge  those  standards,  and  I  think  that  Pro- 
fessor Sturtevant  has  suggested  the  means  by  which  you  can  arrive  at  the  truth 
on  this  subject.    You  will  find  that  he  says:     "This  function  of  money  becomes 


IN  THE  SUCKER  STATE  575 

very  important  in  the  case  of  time  contracts.  If  one  contracts  to  pay  one 
hundred  bushels  of  wheat  in  twelve  months,  the  next  harvest  may  be  a  very 
bad  one,  and  he  may  therefore  be  under  the  necessity  of  paying  one  hundred 
bushels  when  a  bushel  is  worth  twice  as  much  as  when  the  contract  was  made. 
This  makes  the  transaction  inequitable,  and  such  a  liability  will  make  men  averse 
to  all  time  contracts,  and  throw  a  great  impediment  in  the  way  of  the  working 
of  the  natural  law  of  exchange." 

The  doctor  recognizes  that  when  a  man  has  made  a  contract  he  ought  to  be 
paid  in  the  same  quantity  or  value  that  the  contract  had  when  it  was  made;  and  he 
goes  on  to  argue  that  if  you  attempt  to  make  contracts  in  any  kind  of  com- 
modity, the  fluctuations  in  value  will  make  the  contract  inequitable,  and  then  he 
turns  to  gold  and  silver  and  says:  "In  the  two  metals,  gold  and  silver,  we  have 
substances  which  possess  to  a  degree  quite  wonderful  the  essential  quality  of 
money — universal  desirableness.  They  sustain  such  a  relation  to  human  taste 
and  use  that  they  have  been  universally  desired  all  along  the  world's  history, 
from  the  earliest  antiquity  of  which  we  have  any  authentic  record.  Nor  is 
there  any  reason  to  suppose  that  in  the  future,  however  distant,  they  are  to  be 
supplanted  from  that  place  in  human  regard  which  they  have  always  occupied." 

And  a  little  further  along  he  says,  "Gold  and  silver,  considered  as  a  standard 
of  value,  are  an  ocean  flowing  around  the  whole  economic  world,  and  very  large 
additions  at  two  or  three  points  are  immediately  distributed  to  every  part,  like 
water  which  is  poured  into  the  ocean  from  a  single  river,  and  can  have  no 
appreciable  effect  on  its  level."  I  was  glad,  when  I  began  to  study  the  money 
question,  to  find  that  Dr,  Sturtevant  recognized  that  the  great  thing  desirable 
in  a  dollar  is  stability,  and  I  can  find  no  better  illustration  than  the  one  I  first 
read  you,  where  he  speaks  of  its  being  inequitable  to  compel  a  man  to  deliver 
one  hundred  bushels  of  wheat  when  wheat  has  doubled  in  value. 

You  know  the  whole  contention  in  this  contest  in  which  we  are  engaged 
is  as  to  which  kind  of  standard  gives  you  the  best  dollar.  There  are  some 
people  who  talk  about  honest  dollars,  without  exactly  defining  what  they 
mean  by  that,  so  that  you  have  to  take  their  conclusions  instead  of  being  able 
to  form  your  own  conclusions.  We  believe  that  gold  and  silver  used  together 
give  a  more  stable  dollar,  a  more  equitable  currency,  a  more  just  standard 
than  could  be  obtained  from  the  use  of  one,  with  the  other  eliminated  from 
use;  and  the  very  argument  which  Dr.  Sturtevant  makes  there,  that  a  short  crop 
of  wheat  will  make  wheat  rise  in  value,  applies  to  money;  because  if  there  is 
a  short  crop  of  money,  money  rises  in  value. 

Now,  the  crops  are  determined  usually  by  the  weather  and  by  various 
things  which  man  may  not  control,  but  the  volume  of  money  is  determined  by 
law,  which  man  does  control.  And  so,  if  you  by  law  make  your  crop  of  money 
short,  you  raise  the  value  of  the  dollar;  and  if  you  raise  the  value  of  the  dollar 
you  produce  the  same  injustice  to  the  man  who  owes  a  dollar,  that  Mr.  Sturte- 
vant calls  attention  to  in  the  case  of  wheat  that  doubles  in  value. 

I  want  you  young  men  to  realize  that,  when  you  have  received  great 
advantages,  great  responsibilities  go  with  those  advantages.  You  have  no 
right,  as  citizens  in  a  land  like  this,  to  keep  in  darkness  upon  any  public  ques- 
tion; nor  have  you  a  right  to  listen  to  any  persuasions  except  the  persuasions 


576  IN  THE  SUCKER  STATE. 

which  come  from  your  conscience  and  your  judgment.  I  appreciate  the 
advantage  of  living  in  a  country  Hke  this.  You  may  have  had  people  tell  you 
that  my  ideas  are  antagonistic  to  our  form  of  government  and  to  law  and  order. 
But  I  want  you  to  believe  me  when  I  say  that  there  is  not  a  person  in  this 
country  who  love  our  institutions  more  than  I  do,  or  who  feels  a  deeper  inter- 
est in  their  preservation. 

And  what  young  man  has  more  reason  to  prize  our  institutions  than  I  have? 
In  what  other  country  is  It  possible  for  a  young  man  to  accomplish  as  much 
as  he  can  accomplish  in  this  country?  In  what  other  country  is  it  possible 
for  a  young  man,  with  nothing  to  commend  him  except  his  interest  in  a 
cause,  to  be  selected  by  those  who  believe  with  him  to  carry  out  their  ideas? 
I  so  much  prize  the  advantages  of  a  country  like  this  that  I  want  to  keep 
this  government  as  our  forefathers  intended  it.  I  want  it  to  rest  securely 
upon  the  foundations  which  they  laid,  so  that  it  will  guarantee  equal  rights 
to  all  citizens,  and  give  special  privileges  to  no  citizen.  I  want  it  to  be  still 
possible  for  the  child  of  the  humblest  citizen  in  this  land  to  aspire  to  any 
office  to  which  his  abilities,  his  ideas,  his  labors  and  his  integrity  fit  him. 

And  if  is  because  I  realize,  as  I  think  I  do,  some  of  the  influences  which  in 
society  are  tending  to  close  the  door  of  opportunity  to  young  men,  that  I 
have  felt  the  indignation  that  I  have  expressed  against  the  great  aggregations 
of  wealth,  which  have  in  many  instances  trampled  upon  the  rights  of  weaker 
members  of  society,  and  have  attempted  to  drive  out  competition,  and  then 
prey  upon  society  after  it  has  been  rendered  helpless  and  lies  at  their  mercy. 

But,  my  friends,  I  am  here  to  greet  you,  rather  than  to  talk  to  you.  I 
have  digressed  somewhat  from  my  purpose  because  I  have  so  little  chance  to 
have  my  side  of  the  question  at  issue  heard  in  many  of  our  institutions  of 
learning  that  I  felt  that  I  ought  not  to  neglect  an  opportunity  to  say  a  word 
in  defense  of  the  cause  for  which  I  stand.  I  sometimes  read  in  the  papers  that 
nearly  all  of  the  professors  in  the  various  colleges  are  against  me,  but  I  shall 
teach  what  I  believe  in,  though  not  a  college  professor  or  business  man  or  man 
prominent  in  society  is  willing  to  stand  with  me.  I  know  that  all  the  great 
reforms  of  society  have  come  up  from  the  common  people — not  down  from 
those  who  are  well-to-do  or  who  are  so  surrounded  that  they  do  not  know  the 
needs  of  the  people. 

I  remember  that  the  Bible  tells  us  that,  when  a  young  man  was  inquiring 
what  he  ought  to  do  and  was  told  to  sell  what  he  had  and  give  to  the  poor, 
"he  went  away  grieved  for  he  had  great  possessions."  Great  possessions  some- 
times so  monopolize  a  person's  thoughts,  so  occupy  his  time  that  he  is  not 
able  to  consider  the  needs  of  society  which  are  felt  and  realized  by  those  who 
sufifer.  I  want  you  in  the  study  of  all  questions,  not  to  take  somebody  else's 
views  but  to  try  and  find  out  for  yourselves  what  is  best  for  the  people.  And  be 
sure  that  the  policies  which  you  advocate  are  such  as  will  lift  up  those  about 
you  as  well  as  yourselves.  The  Bible  says  that  he  who  would  be  chief  est 
among  you  must  be  the  servant  of  all;  and  if  I  can  leave  with  you  but  one 
thought  to  be  remembered  as  you  go  from  college  to  undertake  the  duties  of 
life  I  want  to  leave  this  thought:  The  only  greatness  that  there  is  in  this 
world  lies  in  service.     When  history  writes  an  account  of  your  lives  and  records 


m  THE  SUCKER  STATE.  577 

the  debts  due  to  you,  that  person  will  be  the  greatest  In  history— will  be  the 
chiefest  among  all — who  has  been  the  servant  of  all.  The  more  you  accom- 
plish for  others,  the  more  you  accomplish  for  yourselves. 

I  shall  always  remember  the  days  spent  in  Illinois  College.  As  an  insti- 
tution must  suffer  from  the  wrongful  acts  of  any  one  who  has  been  educated 
within  its  walls  and  from  any  disgrace  which  comes  to  an  alumnus,  so  the  col- 
lege is  entitled  to  share  in  all  the  honors  and  good  fortune  that  may  come  to 
those  whom  the  college  has  helped  to  start  in  life. 

There  was  a  parade  during  the  forenoon  and  a  meeting  in  the 
public  square  in  the  afternoon,  followed  by  an  address  to  the  ladies  at 
the  opera  house.  Jacksonville  is  the  home  of  Congressman-Elect 
William  H.  Hinrichsen,  then  Secretary  of  State,  and  the  Democrats 
of  that  county  are  nearly  all  of  the  bimetallic  variety. 

From  Jacksonville  we  went  to  Alton,  where  I  made  two  speeches, 
and  from  Alton  we  traveled  by  night  to  Lincoln.  At  this  place  I  spoke 
of  the  argument  sometimes  made  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  would 
cause  a  panic,  and  explained  the  position  taken  by  bimetallists — name- 
ly, that  the  free  coinage  of  silver,  by  taking  out  of  gold  the  additional 
purchasing  power  which  has  been  forced  in  it  by  legislation,  would 
cheapen  it,  and,  instead  of  hoarding  it,  the  holders  of  money  would 
be  anxious  to  invest  it  in  property  and  obtain  the  benefit  of  the  rise. 
At  Bloomington  we  were  met  by  Vice-President  Stevenson  and  wife, 
and  he  presided  at  the  meeting  at  that  place.  The  speech  here  was 
brief,  the  following  being  a  part. 

Bloomington  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  While  it  is  pleasant  to  greet  the 
people  in  any  part  of  this  nation,  I  find  a  special  gratification  in  being  permitted 
to  speak  to  the  people  of  Bloomington,  because  this  is  the  home  of  the  Vice- 
President  of  the  greatest  nation  on  God's  footstool.  We,  who  have  been 
keepers  of  the  Democratic  faith,  love  Adlai  Stevenson,  not  only  for  what  he 
is,  but  we  love  him  also  because  he  is  all  we  have  left  of  the  last  National 
Democratic  ticket. 

The  Bible  tells  you  of  the  father  who  loved  the  prodigal  son  when  he 
returned.  I  tell  you  of  the  Democratic  father  who  loves  the  son  who  went  not 
astray.  How  we  shall  feel  toward  the  prodigal  son  if  he  comes  back  I  cannot 
say,  but,  my  friends,  I  know  how  we  feel  toward  the  son  who  has  stayed  at 
home  instead  of  going  out  to  feed  the  hogs  of  the  enemy. 

If  you  have  any  doubt  as  to  the  Democracy  of  our  position  on  the  money 
question,  I  want  you  to  read  what  the  Republican  candidate  for  the  Presidency 
said  yesterday.    He  said  in  a  speech  from  the  front  porch: 

Every  dollar  representing  one  hundred  cents  and  good  not  only  among  our  own 
people,  but  wherever  trade  goes,  in  every  mart  and  market  place  of  the  world.  It 
was  made  by  the  Republican  party;  but,  let  me  say,  while  it  was  made  by  the  Republican 
party,  the  administration  of  Orover  Cleveland  has  maintained  it. 


578  IN  THE  SUCKER  STATE. 

There  he  tells  you  that  Grover  Cleveland  has  simply  carried  out  the  policy 
of  the  Republican  party  and  inferentially  tells  you  that  in  case  of  Republican 
success  the  Republican  party  for  four  years  will  carry  out  the  policy  of  Grover 
Cleveland. 

This  administration  has  issued  $262,000,000  in  bonds  to  maintain  the  gold 
standard  for  three  years,  and  Mr.  McKinley  praises  Mr.  Cleveland  for  having 
maintained  the  gold  standard.  When  Mr.  McKinley  says  that  Mr.  Cleveland 
has  maintained  Republican  doctrine  and  praises  Mr.  Cleveland,  you  have  reason 
to  believe  that  if  Mr.  McKinley  is  elected  he  will  go  on  issuing  bonds  for  the 
benefit  of  the  bondholders  and  taxing  the  people  to  pay  for  them. 

My  friends,  these  are  strange  times.  You  will  not  find  in  our  political 
history  another  instance  where  a  president  has  been  thrown  overboard  by  his 
own  party  only  to  be  caught  up  and  idolized  by  the  opposing  party.  Yet  that 
is  what  you  find  today.  The  only  people  who  are  commending  the  financial 
policy  of  Grover  Cleveland  are  the  men  who  are  trying  to  elect  a  Republican 
President  to  continue  that  policy  for  four  years  more.  Are  you  surprised  when 
you  find  that  the  policy  inaugurated  at  St.  Louis  and  reiterated  by  the 
Republican  candidate,  is  driving  out  of  the  Republican  party  those  who  still 
believe  in  a  government  of  the  people,  by  the  people  and  for  the  people? 

I  have  been  introduced  this  morning  to  Republicans  who  until  this  year 
voted  the  Republican  ticket,  but  who  this  year  are  joining  with  us  to  restore  the 
money  of  the  Constitution.  I  am  proud  of  the  kind  of  men  who  are  coming 
to  us. 

From  Bloomington  we  went  to  Chicago,  stopping"  at  Pontiac, 
Dwight,  Braidwood,  Joliet  and  Lamont.  At  Braidwood  the  audience 
was  largely  composed  of  miners,  and  I  repeated  what  I  had  said  on 
other  occasions,  that  in  a  test  of  endurance  the  farmer  can  stand  the 
gold  standard  longer  than  the  laboring  man  can.  If  his  farm  is  fore- 
closed, he  can  become  a  tenant,  because  those  who  hold  mortgages 
would  not,  as  a  rule,  care  about  cultivating  the  farms  themselves.  So 
far  as  food  is  concerned  the  farmer  can  supply  his  absolute  needs  from 
the  farm,  and  if  it  becomes  necessary,  his  wife  and  daughters  can  again 
make  the  clothing  for  the  family,  but  the  laboring  man  loses  his  means 
of  subsistence  when  he  loses  his  work.  The  farmer  has  a  double 
chance,  while  the  miner  has  scarcely  one.  If  corn  gets  so  cheap  that 
the  farmer  cannot  afford  to  buy  coal,  he  can  burn  corn,  but  the  miner 
cannot  eat  coal. 

The  meetings  at  Joliet  and  Pontiac  were  both  largely  attended. 
We  reached  Chicago  about  four  o'clock. 

During  the  trip  through  Illinois  we  were  joined  from  time  to  time 
by  persons  who  were  speaking  for  silver,  among  them  Hon.  Alfred 
Orendorf,  of  Springfield,  Judge  William  Prentiss  and  Judge  Shackel- 
ford, of  Chicago,  Hon.  Free  P.  Morris,  of  Watseka,  and  Hon.  W.  H. 
Green,  of  Cairo. 


IN  THE  SUCKER  STA  TE.  579 

At  Peoria  Mr.  Tomlinson  left  us.  By  his  unassuming  ways  and 
genial  manner,  as  well  as  by  his  tact  and  good  judgment,  he  had  at- 
tached himself  to  all  of  the  members  of  the  party  and  we  were  sorry  to 
part  with  him.  His  place  was  taken  by  an  old  Jacksonville  friend,  Mr. 
M.  F.  Dunlap,  who  stayed  with  us  until  we  reached  Chicago.  Mr. 
Dunlap  was  the  best  timekeeper  I  found  on  the  trip.  He  always 
pulled  my  coat  when  my  time  was  up  and  thus  enabled  us  to  reach 
Chicago  according  to  schedule.  Messrs.  Cantrell  and  Bentley,  who 
were  with  us  through  Southern  Illinois,  again  had  charge  of  our  train. 
They  are  both  large  men  and  were  able  to  make  a  way  through  any 
crowd.  Bentley 's  county.  Pike,  gave  a  largely  increased  majority, 
which,  I  believe,  was  due  in  part  to  his  exertions,  although  Mrs.  Bryan 
claims  some  credit  for  the  increase,  owing  to  the  fact  that  it  was  her 
early  home. 


3.1 


CHAPTER  XLVII. 


THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN. 

THE  Chicago  campaign  covered  three  days.  Immediately  upon 
our  arrival,  Tuesday  afternoon,  a  reception  was  given  at  Bat- 
tery D,  in  which  all  the  organizations,  ward  clubs,  and  friendly 
labor  organizations  participated.  Just  after  Hon.  Alexander  J.  Jones 
had  delivered  an  address  of  welcome,  Mr.  M.  Shapiro,  on  behalf  of  the 
Hebrew  Democrats,  presented  me  a  beautiful  badge,  one  of  the  hand- 
somest received  during  the  campaign.  Replying  to  the  address  of 
welcome  and  to  the  presentation,  I  said: 

Qiicago  Speech — Second  Reception. 

Mr.  Chairman  and  Fellow-Citizens:  I  came  to  Chicago  as  I  started  on  my 
way  to  New  York  to  open  this  campaign  and  I  return  to  your  city  to  take  part 
in  the  closing  exercises  of  the  campaign.  I  have  witnessed  today  a  scene 
which  impresses  me  very  much  and  which  leads  me  to  believe  that  the  great 
city  of  the  West,  which  rests  upon  the  prosperity  of  the  masses  and  cannot 
prosper  unless  they  prosper,  will  cast  its  influence  one  week  from  today  on  the 
side  of  an  American  financial  policy  for  the  American  people.  I  beg  to  express 
my  deep  gratitude  to  the  organizations  which  participated  in  this  welcome. 
But  I  am  not  vain  enough  to  believe  that  any  part  of  the  extraordinary  en- 
thusiasm which  I  have  witnessed  between  the  Miss'^ri  River  and  the  Atlantic 
Ocean  is  intended  as  a  personal  tribute.  In  this  great  contest  it  is  the 
principles  for  which  the  candidate  stands,  and  not  the  candidate  himself, 
that  has  called  forth  this  demonstration. 

There  is  only  one  thing  for  which  I  claim  any  credit.  I  believe  that 
you,  and  others  who  have  expressed  themselves  as  you  have,  have  confidence 
that  I  will  carry  out  the  pledges  which  I  have  made  during  this  campaign. 
It  is  simply  your  confidence  that  I  will  do  what  I  have  promised  to  do  and 
carry  out  the  ideas  for  which  I  stand  in  this  campaign,  that  is  personal.  But, 
my  friends,  what  credit  is  it  to  a  man  to  be  what  he  seems  to  be?  If  I  were 
other  than  true  to  the  principles  which  I  have  advocated,  I  would  be  beneath 
the  contempt  of  those  whose  suffrages  I  ask. 

I  do  believe  that  in  this  campaign  a  great  question  is  to  be  determined 
for  the  present  at  least.  I  do  believe  that  the  settlement  of  that  great  question 
affects  every  man,  woman  and  child  in  this  land,  and  when  I  see  the  people 
stirred  as  they  have  seldom  been  stirred  before,  I  believe  that  they  appreciate 
the  responsibilities  of  citizenship,  and  that  they  intend  that  their  ballots  shall 
be  cast  for  that  financial  system  which  they  believe  to  be  best  for  themselves, 
for  their  neighbors  and  for  their  country. 

580 


THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN.  581 

I  appreciate,  too,  the  kindly  feeling  which  has  prompted  the  presentation 
of  this  badge  by  the  Hebrew  Democrats.  Our  opponents  have  sometimes 
tried  to  make  it  appear  that  we  were  attacking  a  race  when  we  denounced  the 
financial  policy  advocated  by  the  Rothschilds.  But  we  are  not;  we  are  as  much 
opposed  to  the  financial  policy  of  J.  Pierpont  Morgan  as  we  are  to  the  financial 
policy  of  the  Rothschilds.  We  are  not  attacking  a  race;  we  are  attacking  greed 
and  avarice,  which  know  neither  race  nor  religion.  I  do  not  know  of  any  class 
of  our  people  who,  by  reason  of  their  history,  can  better  sympathize  with 
the  struggling  masses  in  this  campaign  than  can  the  Hebrew  race. 

The  Bible  tells  us  that  when  the  children  of  Israel  were  in  bondage  and 
asked  for  a  lightening  of  their  burdens,  the  Pharaoh  of  their  time  said  that  they 
were  idle,  and  recommended  more  work.  He  compelled  them  to  make  bricks 
without  straw.  Pharaoh  has  been  the  same  in  all  ages.  No  matter  to  what 
race  he  belongs,  no  matter  when  or  where  he  lives,  Pharaoh  lives  on  the  toil 
of  others  and  always  wants  to  silence  complaint  by  making  the  load  heavier. 

In  presenting  this  badge  my  Hebrew  friends  have  referred  to  David  and 
Goliath.  Whenever  we  have  a  great  contest  in  which  right  is  arrayed  against 
might,  the  contest  between  David  and  Goliath  is  always  cited  to  give  inspira- 
tion to  those  who  fight  for  the  truth.  David  conquered,  not  because  he  was 
stronger,  but  because  he  was  on  the  right  side;  and  if  in  this  contest  I  am 
likened  to  David,  let  me  reply  that  as  David  triumphed  because  he  was  right, 
so  my  only  hope  of  victory  is  in  the  righteousness  of  my  cause. 

I  may  be  wrong — I  have  never  claimed  infallibility — but  when  I  examine 
a  question  and  reach  a  conclusion,  I  am  willing  to  stand  by  what  I  believe, 
I  care  not  what  may  happen.  In  this  struggle  for  the  restoration  of  bimetallism 
there  was  a  time  when  I  had  less  company  than  I  have  now. 

Some  of  the  Chicago  papers  have  called  me  a  demagogue.  If  there  is  one 
thing  which  I  am  not,  it  is  a  demagogue.  A  demagogue  is  a  man  who 
advocates  a  thing  which  he  does  not  believe  in  order  to  conciliate  those  who 
dififer  from  him.  A  demagogue  is  a  man  who  is  willing  to  advocate  anything, 
whether  he  believes  it  or  not,  which  will  be  advantageous  to  him  and  gain 
him  popularity.  Now,  my  friends,  I  have  never  advocated,  during  my  public 
life,  a  single  thing  which  I  did  not  myself  believe.  I  have  proven  my  willing- 
ness to  go  down  in  defeat  when  I  was  in  a  minority  rather  than  surrender  my 
convictions,  and  I  have  always  been  willing  to  accept  defeat  when  it  came.  I 
say  this  here  because  in  this  city  most  of  the  papers  are  against  us,  and  I 
must  defend  myself. 

If  there  is  anybody  in  this  city  who  believes  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver 
will  be  injurious  to  this  country,  he  has  a  reason  for  voting  against  those 
who  stand  for  free  coinage,  but  I  do  not  want  any  person  who  is  in  favor  of  the 
money  of  the  Constitution  to  be  deterred  from  voting  for  those  who  stand  for 
that  money  by  any  abuse  which  our  opponents  may  use  against  us  between 
now  and  election  day.  I  shall  be  in  this  city  for  a  few  days,  and  shall  see  as 
many  of  your  people  as  it  is  possible  to  see  in  that  time,  and  I  shall  defend  before 
these  people  the  principles  for  which  I  stand.  And  more  than  that,  I  am  going  to 
talk  to  the  people  themselves;  I  shall  not  go  to  the  employers  and  bargain 
with  them  for  the  delivery  of  the  votes  of  their  employes.     I  have  been  taught 


582  THB  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN. 

to  believe  that  the  ballot  was  given  to  the  individual  for  his  own  use,  and  that 
the  person  who  has  the  right  to  vote  has  also  the  ability  to  determine  how  he 
ought  to  vote.  Therefore  in  this  campaign  I  shall  address  my  arguments  to 
the  individual  voters,  not  to  the  head  of  a  firm,  or  to  the  president  of  a  cor- 
poration, or  to  the  boss  of  a  railroad. 

Three  political  parties  have  declared  that  the  money  question  is  the  para- 
mount issue  and  the  bolting  Democrats — who  are  helping  the  Republican  ticket 
without  the  courage  to  openly  support  it — have  declared  that  this  money 
question  is  the  paramount  issue.  The  leading  Republicans  also  have  admitted 
it,  and  yet  when  our  opponents  are  driven  to  the  wall  on  the  money  question 
and  have  failed  in  their  attempt  to  defend  themselves  before  the  American 
people,  they  have  attempted  to  turn  the  discussion  oflf  from  the  money  ques- 
tion onto  other  questions;  but  I  give  them  notice  that  for  one  week  more 
they  must  face  the  money  question. 

In  the  past,  the  gold  standard  has  gained  every  victory  under  cover  and 
in  the  dark;  and  in  this  campaign  the  gold  standard,  having  failed  before  the 
people,  is  seeking  to  secure  its  hold  upon  the  American  people  under  cover 
of  the  pretense  that  the  nation  is  in  danger  if  those  who  believe  in  the  Chicago 
platform  are  successful. 

I  am  willing  to  trust  to  the  intelligence  of  the  American  people  to  decide 
whether  this  Government  is  safer  in  the  hands  of  those  who  believe  in  the 
ability  of  the  people  to  govern  themselves,  or  in  the  hands  of  the  trusts  and  syn- 
dicates which  have  been  bleeding  the  people. 

I  am  willing  to  let  the  American  people  decide  whether  our  affairs  are  safer 
in  the  hands  of  those  who  believe  in  our  form  of  government  and  who  would, 
if  necessary,  die  to  perpetuate  it,  or  whether  it  is  safer  in  the  hands  of  a 
few  financiers  who  cannot  think  on  the  money  question  until  they  have  cabled 
to  London  to  find  out  what  to  think. 

That  evening  meetings  were  held  in  some  nine  different  places,  the 
last  one  at  Tattersall's,  where  floral  devices  were  presented  by  the 
horseshoers  and  by  the  Hebrew  organizations. 

On  the  next  day,  the  most  important  meeting  of  a  series  was  held 
— namely,  the  business  men's  meeting  at  Battery  D,  at  twelve  o'clock. 
The  speech  delivered  on  that  occasion  will  be  found  below: 

Chicago  Speech  to  Business  Men* 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  I  am  glad  that  this  meeting  is 
presided  over  by  one  who  until  this  time  has  been  a  Republican  and  by  one  who 
has  been  a  soldier,  because  in  this  double  character  of  ex-Republican  and  ex- 
soldier,  he  illustrates  the  depth  to  which  society  is  stirred  by  the  issues  now 
before  us.  As  an  ex-Republican,  he  stands  as  a  representative  of  that  large 
and  increasing  number  of  our  citizens  who  are  willing  to  break  asunder  party 
ties  and  leave  party  associates  in  order  to  make  their  party  affiliations  suit 
their  convictions;  and  as  a  former  soldier  he  stands  as  the  representative  of 
those,  who,  having  willingly  offered  their  services  to  make  this  nation  one, 


THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN.  583 

are  willing  to  engage  in  this  great  contest  which  is  to  determine  whether  the 
nation  which  they  helped  to  save  shall  remain  an  independent  nation  or 
become  a  province  of  a  foreign  empire. 

I  am  glad  to  talk  to  business  men.  I  have  said  that  those  who  so  often 
assume  to  be  the  only  business  men  sometimes  make  a  great  mistake  in 
supposing  that  the  prosperity  of  a  nation  rests  upon  them.  I  am  going  to 
talk  today  to  business  men,  and  I  want  to  say  to  you  that  in  pleading  the 
cause  of  the  farmer  and  the  laborer  I  am  trying  to  lay  a  substantial  foundation 
upon  which  the  business  of  this  country  can  be  done.  If  you  engage  in 
merchandise  and  in  the  exchange  of  wealth,  and  suppose  that  the  prosperity 
of  the  producer  depends  upon  you,  you  deceive  yourselves.  Wealth  must  be 
created  before  it  can  be  distributed.  Those  who  create  wealth  could  live 
although  you  should  go  out  of  business,  but  you  cannot  live  if  the  producers 
of  wealth  go  out  of  business.  I  believe  that  that  policy  is  best  for  this  country 
which  brings  prosperity  first  to  those  who  toil;  give  them  first  the  inspiration  to 
work  and  then  protect  them  in  the  enjoyment  of  their  rightful  share  of  the 
proceeds  of  their  toil,  and  their  prosperity  will  find  its  way  up  to  the  other 
class  of  society  which  rests  upon  them.  I  challenge  you  to  find  in  the  pages 
of  recorded  history  a  single  instance  where  prosperity  came  from  the  upper 
crust  of  society;  it  always  comes  from  the  masses, — the  foundation  of  society. 
I  desire  to  talk  to  you  who  are  business  men  for  another  reason.  I  believe 
that  many  of  you  are  being  tyrannized  over  by  financial  influences.  My 
friends,  you  need  not  point  back  to  times  of  war  to  find  heroes.  The  year 
1896  has  developed  heroes  in  this  nation.  I  know  business  men  who  have 
been  summoned  before  their  bankers  and  told  that  their  notes  would  not 
be  extended  if  they  insisted  on  talking  for  free  silver;  I  know  one  man 
who  was  called  into  the  bank  and  told  that  he  would  have  to  look  elsewhere 
for  accommodation  if  he  did  not  stop  talking  for  free  silver,  and  that  man 
replied  that  he  realized  that  the  banker  had  him  in  his  power;  that  if  the 
banker  had  a  mind  to,  he  could  call  for  the  payment  of  his  notes,  close  up 
his  store  and  wipe  out  all  the  accumulation  of  years  of  industry,  but  he  added: 
"I  believe  that  humanity  is  involved  in  this  question,  and  I  shall  continue  to 
oppose  the  gold  standard.  You  can  take  my  property  if  you  like,  but  you 
cannot  have  my  soul."  It  requires  heroism  for  a  man  to  stand  in  the  presence 
of  a  financial  despot  and  bid  him  do  his  worst.  I  believe  that  the  mercantile 
classes  have  suffered  as  much  as  any  other  class  of  people  by  a  government  by 
banks,  and  when  I  preach  to  the  common  people  deliverance  from  the  money 
changer,  I  preach  to  the  business  men  deliverance  from  the  tyranny  of  the 
bank.  I  assert  that  the  man  who  loans  you  money  has  no  right  to  control  your 
vote,  and  that  the  man  who,  because  he  loans  you  money,  attempts  to  rob  you 
of  your  citizenship,  should  be  made  to  feel  the  contempt  of  an  injured  and 
indignant  people.  I  know  it  is  not  polite  to  say  anything  against  these 
financiers  who  think  so  well  of  themselves.  But  if  they  do  not  want  to 
have  hard  things  said  about  them,  let  them  cease  to  be  despots  and  learn  to 
be  just. 

I  ask  you  business  men  to  think  over  this  proposition  from  now  until 
election  day:     If  the  gold  standard  is  a  good  thing,  why  is  it  that  those  who 


584  THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN. 

advocate  it  resort  to  deception?  Are  you  compelled  to  resort  to  deception 
when  you  are  selling  something  whose  qualities  are  good?  Are  you  compelled 
to  resort  to  deception  when  you  are  selling  goods  upon  their  merits?  Now, 
when  you  are  selling  something  which  has  merits,  you  present  its  merits,  and 
when  you  see  a  man  resort  to  deception,  it  is  a  confession  that  the  thing 
which  he  advocates  is  not  able  to  stand  upon  its  own  merits.  I  assert  that  the 
platform  adopted  by  the  Republican  party  this  year  is  a  fraud.  I  assert  that 
it  was  intended  as  a  fraud,  and  that  the  men  who  wrote  it,  so  wrote  it  as  to 
deceive  the  people  and  to  secure  an  advantage  by  deception  which  they  could 
not  obtain  otherwise.  If  you  desire  my  proof,  I  will  read  you  a  few  editorials. 
I  am  going  to  speak  of  a  distinguished  editor  of  your  city,  for  whom,  as  an 
individual,  I  have  the  highest  respect,  and  I  believe  that  he  entertains  for  me 
the  same  kindly  feeling  that  I  entertain  for  him,  but  he  believes  that  my  election 
would  be  dangerous  to  the  country,  and  I  believe  that  his  action  on  the  money 
question  has  been  hostile  to  the  best  interests  of  our  people.  I  shall  cite  him 
and  his  words  as  an  evidence  of  the  attempt  of  the  Republican  party  to  deceive 
the  American  people. 

If  you  will  read  the  Times-Herald  of  June  17,  you  will  find  these  words  in 
the  dispatch  from  St.  Louis: 

It  is  only  a  matter  of  simple  justice  to  Mr.  Kohlsaat  for  me  to  report  what 
everybody  in  St.  Louis  who  is  familiar  with  the  facts  is  saying  tonight,  that  the 
credit  of  having  secured  the  adoption  of  this  straight  and  unmistakable  money  plank 
by  the  Republican  National  Convention  is  due  more  to  him  than  to  anyone  else. 

There  in  his  own  paper  he  has  published  a  statement  from  his  own  cor- 
respondent that  he,  more  than  anyone  else,  is  responsible  for  the  money  plank 
adopted  by  the  St.  Louis  convention.     Now  what  does  this  plank  say: 

We  are  therefore  opposed  to  the  free  coinage  of  silver  except  by  international  agree- 
ment with  the  leading  commercial  nations  of  the  world, .  which  we  pledge  ourselves  to 
promote;  and  until  such  agreement  can  be  obtained,  the  existing  gold  standard  must  be 
preserved. 

Now  note  the  words.  The  platform  declares  that  until  the  leading  com- 
mercial nations  of  the  world  will  join  in  bimetallism,  the  gold  standard  must 
be  preserved,  and  the  platform  contains  this  promise,  "which  we  pledge  our- 
selves to  promote." 

Now  there  is  the  declaration  that  we  must  maintain  the  gold  standard  until 
we  can  get  international  bimetallism,  but  that  the  Republican  party  is  pledged 
to  promote  international  bimetallism.  Now  what  else  do  we  find  in  that  paper? 
The  correspondent,  speaking  of  the  platform,  says: 

The  qualifying  words  used  by  the  committee  pledging  the  party  to  endeavor  to 
promote  an  international  agreement,  are  intended  to  strengthen  the  platform  from 
the  political  point  of  view  without  In  any  way  weakening  it  as  a  frank  and  fearless 
declaration  for  the  gold  standard.  As  it  is  and  has  been,  the  Republican  policy  to 
promote  international  bimetallism,  and  as  such  bimetallism  is  earnestly  desired  by 
almost  everyone  In  the  country  of  both  parties,  nothing  is  lost  and  something  U 
gained  by  giving  the  western  Republicans  a  ray  of  hope  in  the  future. 

Now,  my  friends,  if  you  will  look  in  the  6th  of  June  issue  of  the  same  paper 
— only  a  few  days  before — you  will  find  this  editorial: 


THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN.  585 

Any  reference  to  an  international  agreement  is  shifty  and  futile.  It  deceivea 
nobody,  because  everyone  knows,  first,  that  there  is  not  the  slightest  possibility  of  an 
International  agreement  at  any  ratio;  and,  second,  that  if  such  an  agreement  were 
formally  entered  into,  no  government  could  be  bound  to  abide  by  it  a  day  longer 
than  its  own  industrial  and  commercial  interests  would  appear  to  warrant. 

In  the  paper  owned  by  the  man  who  wrote  the  platform  you  find  a  declara- 
tion only  ten  days  before  the  convention  that  any  reference  to  an  international 
agreement  is  shifty  and  futile;  that  it  deceives  nobody  because  every  one  knows 
that  there  is  not  the  slightest  possibility  of  international  agreement  at  any  ratio. 
Within  ten  days  after  that  editorial  appears  in  the  Times-Herald,  the  editor 
writes  a  plank  which  pledges  the  Republican  party  to  every  effort  to  promote 
international  bimetallism,  and  then  the  same  paper  reports  in  its  dispatches 
from  St.  Louis  that  this  pledge  is  put  in  there  to  give  a  ray  of  hope  to  the 
Republicans  of  the  West. 

Now,  my  friends,  I  want  you  to  remember  that  that  phrase  pledging  the 
Republican  party  to  promote  bimetallism  was  meant  as  a  sop  to  the  Re- 
publicans of  the  West,  and  that  it  was  not  the  intention  that  the  Republican 
party  would  put  forth  any  eflfort  to  change  the  gold  standard.  I  have  asserted 
in  the  past,  and  I  reassert  that  if  the  gold  standard  has  been  a  blessing  to  the 
American  people,  we  ought  to  maintain  the  gold  standard;  but  when  a  man 
tells  you  that  the  gold  standard  is  good,  I  want  you  to  tell  him  that  its 
blessings  have  been  so  mysteriously  concealed  from  the  American  people  that 
no  party  has  ever  dared  to  declare  that  the  gold  standard  is  good.  Now,  some 
of  the  newspapers  tell  you  that  I  appeal  to  prejudice;  that  I  try  to  stir  up 
discontent.  I  want  to  present  a  plain  and  simple  proposition  which  you  can 
put  before  your  intelligent  friends,  and  it  is  this:  If  the  gold  standard  has 
merits,  no  party  would  be  pledging  itself  to  get  rid  of  it,  and  if  it  has  no 
merits,  no  party  ought  to  pledge  itself  to  maintain  it. 

Now,  why  is  it  that  Republicans  in  speaking  of  their  financial  policy  always 
talk  about  "sound  money"  instead  of  the  gold  standard?  I  asked  the  question 
last  night,  I  have  asked  it  time  and  again.  Go  into  their  parades,  look  upon 
their  banners;  you  do  not  find  "gold;"  you  always  find  "sound  money."  My 
friends,  we  want  sound  money;  we  are  advocating  a  sounder  money  than  the 
gold  standard  can  give.  But  when  we  talk  about  sound  money  we  tell  you  what 
we  mean  by  it,  and  how  we  are  going  to  get  it.  When  they  talk  about  sound 
money  they  leave  you  to  guess  what  they  mean.  Another  thing,  if  a  man 
comes  to  you  with  a  business  proposition  you  expect  him  to  be  able  to  point 
out  to  you  the  advantages;  you  ask  him  the  details,  and  if  he  tells  you  that  he 
does  not  know  just  how  it  is  going  to  work  you  do  not  have  any  confidence  in 
his  plan,  or  if  he  tells  you  that  his  plan  has  great  merits  but  says:  "I  am  not 
going  to  tell  you  anything  about  it  until  you  invest  your  money  in  the  plan," 
you  would  not  pay  any  attention  to  that  sort  of  a  man,  and  yet  I  want  you  to 
understand  that  in  this  campaign  the  Republican  party  is  not  elaborating  any 

financial  policy. 

It  is  opposing  us  but  it  is  not  proposing  anything.  Now,  if  the  Republican 
party  knows  what  is  best,  why  doesn't  it  tell  the  American  people?  If  the 
Republican  party  has  a  plan  which  will  relieve  our  present  condition,  why 
doesn't  the  Republican  party  submit  that  plan  tP  the  American  people  for  their 


586  THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN. 

verdict?  And  if  they  have  no  plan,  if  they  do  not  know  what  is  best,  what  pre- 
sumption it  is  for  them  to  ask  you  to  trust  them  first  and  let  them  find  out 
afterward  what  is  best! 

I  say  that  we  are  advocating  a  sounder  financial  system  than  they, 
because  when  you  go  to  construct  anything,  whether  it  be  a  house  or  a  finan- 
cial system,  you  must  have  a  foundation  for  it  to  rest  upon,  and  our  opponents 
are  trying  to  construct  a  commercial  fabric  resting  upon  gold  when  they  cannot 
find  the  gold  to  serve  as  the  foundation  for  the  fabric. 

Ask  them  how  much  gold  there  is  in  the  country,  and  they  will  tell  you  the 
Treasury  reports  show  over  $600,000,000.  Ask  them  where  it  is;  they  tell  you 
so  much  in  the  national  bank  vaults;  so  much  in  the  Treasury  at  Washington; 
so  much  in  the  State  banks  and  trust  companies.  They  will  figure  up  some- 
thing more  than  half  of  the  estimated  amount  in  the  country,  and  then  if  you 
ask  them  where  the  rest  is,  they  will  reply:  "That  is  the  invisible  supply  of 
gold  in  the  country."  My  friends,  you  cannot  build  a  house  upon  an  invisible 
foundation.  Go  to  your  bankers  and  ask  them  where  the  gold  is;  they  tell 
you  that  silver  agitation  has  scared  it  out;  that  gold  has  gone  into  hiding 
because  somebody  has  raised  the  question  as  to  whether  there  is  enough  gold 
to  furnish  a  foundation. 

The  very  minute  you  question  the  quantity  of  gold,  gold  becomes  scared 
and  proves  you  are  right  by  getting  out  of  sight.  I  have  illustrated  it  in  this 
way:  No  man  would  want  to  stand  with  a  rope  around  his  neck  and  the  other 
end  of  the  rope  held  by  some  unknown  hand  ofif  in  the  distance.  You  might 
tell  that  man  not  to  be  agitated,  but  the  heart  would  still   flutter. 

My  friends,  such  is  our  condition.  Here  is  a  great  financial  system  rest- 
ing upon  a  handful  of  gold,  and  people  in  a  foreign  land  have  a  string  to  the 
gold,  and  you  never  know  when  they  are  going  to  pull  the  foundation  out  from 
under  your  fabric  and  let  your  entire  commercial  structure  collapse.  Tell  the 
people  not  to  be  agitated!  My  friends,  you  cannot  calm  the  sea  by  a  word; 
as  hopeless  is  it  to  attempt  to  calm  troubled  society  by  telling  the  people  to 
be  quiet  when  they  know  that  catastrophe  stands  just  in  front  of  them  all  the 
time.  I  want  to  ask  you  to  note  this  proposition.  When  we  talk  about  want- 
ing more  money  they  tell  us  that  there  is  plenty  of  money  in  the  country. 

The  moment  you  begin  to  argue  that  there  should  be  more,  they  will  silence 
you  by  pointing  out  the  amount  of  money  in  the  banks  waiting  to  be  loaned; 
then  if  you  say,  "All  right,  if  we  have  enough  money  in  this  country,  now  let's 
have  a  financial  system  of  our  own,"  they  say,  "Oh,  no;  we  cannot  do  that, 
because  if  we  do  that  then  we  cannot  borrow  from  abroad."  Why  do  we  want 
to  borrow  if  we  have  enough? 

Now,  my  friends,  here  are  two  propositions.  You  cannot  escape  both 
of  them.  If  we  have  enough  money  now,  we  do  not  want  any  money  to  come 
from  abroad,  because  then  we  would  have  too  much — and  nobody  wants  too 
much  money.  If  we  need  money  from  abroad,  it  is  conclusive  proof  that  we 
have  not  enough  money  now  in  this  country,  and  if  we  have  not  enough  now, 
I  assert  that  it  is  better  to  have  the  additional  supply  come  out  of  our  mountains, 
and  be  our  own  money,  instead  of  borrowing  it  from  abroad  and  then  paying 
it  back  in  larger  dollars  with  interest  added. 


THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN.  587 

Now,  my  friends,  just  one  other  suggestion  on  this  line.  The  Republican 
platform  pledges  the  Republican  party  to  use  every  effort  to  promote  inter- 
national bimetallism.  How  is  it  going  to  promote  it?  By  making  it  profitable 
for  foreign  creditors  to  object  to  it.  How  can  they  promote  international 
bimetallism  by  making  it  profitable  to  foreign  financiers  to  refuse  our  petition? 
I  promise  you  to  promote  international  bimetallism  and  I  promise  to  do  it  in 
a  more  sensible  way  than  by  making  it  profitable  to  refuse  our  petition.  You 
ask  me  what  our  plan  is.  I  will  tell  you.  We  have  tried  their  plan  for  twenty 
years  and  we  are  further  off  now  than  we  were  when  we  commenced  to  try. 
I  propose  a  different  plan.  They  have  said  to  foreign  creditors  that  if  they, 
the  creditors,  would  object  to  bimetallism,  then  our  people  will  join  with  them  in 
making  the  mortgages  more  valuable  and  the  notes  more  valuable,  and  the 
dollars  larger.  I  propose  a  different  plan.  I  propose  that  the  United  States 
shall  say  that  the  mints  of  this  country  shall  be  open  to  the  free  and  unlimited 
coinage  of  silver,  on  equal  terms  with  gold  at  the  present  ratio,  and  that  the 
money  coined,  gold  and  silver,  shall  be  alike,  a  legal  tender  for  all.  debts, 
public  and  private.  And  then  I  propose  that  we  shall  say  to  our  foreign 
creditors  that  we  intend  to  pay  our  coin  obligations  in  either  gold  or  silver. 
I  propose  that  we  shall  say  to  them:  "Gentlemen,  if  you  conspire  to  make  that 
silver  dollar  worth  less  than  the  gold  dollar,  we  shall  pay  you  in  that  silver 
dollar."  You  say  that  that  is  repudiation.  I  deny  it.  They  bought  our  bonds 
only  a  short  time  ago  and  they  made  a  difference  between  coin  bonds  and 
gold  bonds,  charging  for  the  risk  they  took,  and  now  let  them  have  the  risk 
which  they  charged  for. 

Do  you  say  that  they  have  a  right  to  charge  us  more  because  of  the  risk 
they  took,  and  that  we  have  not  the  right  to  exercise  the  option  which  they 
calculated  on?  That  idea  comes  simply  from  those  who  think  society  should 
be  careful  to  guard  the  interests  of  the  creditor,  and  neglect  every  right  that 
a  debtor  has.  I  noticed  that  some  of  our  critics  are  very  much  excited  because 
the  Chicago  platform  says  that  we  pledge  ourselves  to  secure  such  legislation 
as  will,  for  the  future,  prevent  contracts  for  a  particular  kind  of  money.  We 
are  not  going  to  let  them,  in  the  future,  make  contracts  which  are  against 
public  policy.  We  do  not  intend  that  they  shall  demonetize  by  private  contract 
that  which  this  government  makes  money  by  law.  You  say  that  we  have 
no  right  to  interfere  with  private  contracts?  I  ask  one  of  you  to  enter  into  a 
contract  to  collect  twenty  per  cent,  interest  and  see  whether  the  Government 
has  a  right  to  mterfere?  Upon  what  theory  is  the  usury  law  based?  It  is  based 
upon  the  theory  that  the  man  who  borrows  money  needs  to  be  protected  from 
the  avarice  of  men  who  loan  money. 

That  is  the  basis  of  all  usury  law,  and  when  a  man  tells  me  that  we  have 
no  right  to  protect  the  money  of  the  United  States  from  the  conspiracy  of 
those  who  would  degrade  it,  I  tell  him  we  have  as  much  right  to  prevent  gold 
contracts  or  silver  contracts  as  we  have  to  prevent  one  individual  from 
agreeing  to  pay  another  more  than  a  certain  amount  of  interest.  Talk  about 
freedom  of  contract!  Why,  there  can  only  be  freedom  of  contract  between 
people  who  stand  upon  an  equal  footing.  When  one  is  under  duress  it  is  not 
freedom  of  contract;  it  is  freedom  to  extort  and  protection  to  the  extorters. 


588  THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN. 

Now,  I  want  to  suggest  two  principles  for  you  to  apply  in  the  discussion  of 
the  money  question.  I  want  you  to  understand,  first,  that  the  value  of  the 
dollar  depends  upon  the  number  of  dollars;  that  you  can  make  money  dear 
by  making  money  scarce,  and  lest  somebody  should  accuse  me  of  plagiarism 
after  I  am  gone,  when  I  cannot  answer  the  charge,  I  want  to  admit  now, 
that  when  I  say  that  the  Government  can  make  money  dear  by  making  it 
scarce,  I  am  not  using  my  own  language,  but  only  quoting  what  Mr.  McKinley 
said  in  1891.  '  , 

He  condemned  Mr.  Cleveland's  administration,  because  he  had  attempted  to 
degrade  silver;  had  attempted  to  contract  the  currency  and  thus  make  money 
dearer  by  making  it  scarcer — money  the  master,  all  things  else  the  servant. 
Those  are  the  emphatic  words  of  the  man  who  day  before  yesterday  said  that 
Mr.  Cleveland  had  been  carrying  out  the  Republican  idea,  and  declared  that  if 
elected  he  would  carry  out  Mr.  Cleveland's  idea. 

Now,  my  friends,  if  the  value  of  a  dollar  depends  on  the  number  of 
dollars;  if  making  money  scarce  makes  it  dear,  then  remember  that  the  people 
who  own  money  profit  by  dear  money,  and  that  men  are  apt  to  like  that  which 
is  good  for  them.  And  if  the  laws  are  made  by  men  who  want  money  dear, 
they  will  make  money  scarce  in  order  to  make  it  dear.  If  the  people  want  a 
sufficient  volume  of  money  to  do  business  with,  they  must  secure  that  money 
through  those  who  believe  in  more  money  rather  than  less  money. 

The  other  principle  is  this:  Apply  the  law  of  supply  and  demand  to  silver. 
Increase  the  demand  for  silver  and  you  raise  its  price.  You  decreased  the  price 
by  closing  the  mints;  you  can  rai.e  the  price  by  opening  the  mints.  Now, 
here  is  our  proposition.  It  can  be  stated  in  a  very  few  words.  We  believe 
in  reversing  the  legislation  which  has  driven  gold  and  silver  apart.  We  believe 
that  hostile  legislation  has  raised  the  purchasing  power  of  an  ounce  of  gold  by 
increasing  the  demand  for  gold,  and  that  legislation  has  decreased  the  price  of 
silver  bullion  by  lessening  the  demand  for  silver  bullion,  and  we  believe  that 
we  can  undo  what  the  law  has  done.  We  believe  that  the  opening  of  our  mints 
will  restore  the  demand,  and  that  when  this  nation  stands  ready  to  take  and 
utilize  in  its  currency  every  ounce  of  silver  presented  at  our  mints  at  $1.29  an 
ounce,  then  we  shall  raise  the  value  of  silver  bullion  throughout  the  world,  until 
one  ounce  of  silver  anywhere  will  buy  $1.29  in  gold. 

Do  you  say,  as  some  have  said,  that,  if  we  raise  the  value  of  silver  bullion 
to  the  value  of  gold,  then  a  silver  dollar  will  be  as  hard  to  get  as  the  gold 
dollar  is  now?  No,  my  friends,  you  ignore  another  great  principle.  When  you 
restore  silver  and  make  silver  dollars  competitors  with  gold,  then  you  take 
the  strain  off  of  gold  and  lessen  the  demand  for  gold;  and  lessening  the  demand 
lessens  price.  It  will  be  easier  to  buy  either  a  silver  dollar  or  a  gold  dollar 
with  the  products  of  labor  when  you  can  buy  either,  than  it  is  now  when  you 
have  only  one.  But  I  must  not  dwell  longer  on  this.  I  want  to  call  your  atten- 
tion to  another  point.  My  friends,  our  opponents  have  been  defeated  in  their 
efforts  to  convince  the  people  that  the  gold  standard  ought  to  be  maintained. 
They  are  seeking  to  do  now  what  they  have  always  sought  to  do — win  the 
battle  on  another  issue  and,  having  won  the  battle,  carry  the  gold  standard  a 
little  farther.    They  are  telling  you  that  my  election  would  be  a  menace  to 


THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN.  589 

peace  and  order.  They  tell  you  that  I  stand  for  lawlessness.  I  want  to  say 
to  you,  my  friends,  that  I  stand  not  only  for  the  enforcement  of  every  law, 
but  I  stand  for  arbitration  as  a  means  of  adjusting  difficulties  by  peaceable 
means.  Our  opponents  believe  in  allowing  the  railroads  to  engage  in  a  con- 
troversy with  the  labor  organizations,  and  then  call  out  the  standing  army 
to  preserve  order.  I  believe  in  compelling  them  to  submit  their  difficulties  to  a 
board  of  arbitration  and  thus  adjust  peaceably  what  our  opponents  would  adjust 
by  force.  You  business  men  have  been  told  that  an  era  of  lawlessness  will 
prevail  if  I  am  elected.  I  want  to  tell  you  that  until  we  find  some  means  of 
adjusting  the  difficulties  which  arise  between  labor  and  capital,  some  system 
that  compels  both  to  go  before  impartial  tribunals,  you  can  expect  increasing 
disorder  instead  of  increasing  quiet.     I  believe  in  the  court  of  justice. 

If  one  man  differs  from  another  I  do  not  ask  them  to  go  out  and  settle  it 
by  fighting  it  out.  I  tell  them  to  submit  their  case  to  a  court,  and  let  the  court 
decide,  and  then  let  the  Government  enforce  the  decree  of  that  impartial  tri- 
bunal. And  so,  my  friends,  conditions  have  so  changed  that  it  is  necessary  now 
to  extend  the  principles  of  the  court  of  justice  to  boards  of  arbitration  and  let 
them  sit  in  judgment  upon  the  disputes  that  arise  between  the  carriers  of  our 
interstate  commerce  and  the  employes  of  the  railroads.  I  believe  in  arbitra- 
tion; and,  my  friends,  the  best  evidence  that  the  principle  of  arbitration  is  just 
is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  not  a  Republican  speaker  has  dared  to  stand 
before  an  American  audience  and  condemn  that  plank  in  favor  of  arbitration. 
But  without  trying  to  condemn  it,  they  go  up  and  down  this  land  preserving 
a  discreet  silence  as  to  arbitration.  How  can  you  expect  the  Republican  party 
to  favor  arbitration  if  it  secures  its  hold  upon  the  Government  through  the 
very  men  who  defy  arbitration  and  oppose  it? 

They  tell  you  that  I  will  not  enforce  the  law.  My  friends,  the  fear 
of  these  people  is  not  that  I  will  refuse  to  enforce  the  law;  their  fear  is  that 
I  will  enforce  the  law.  They  know  that  I  entertain  old  fashioned  ideas  upon 
this  subject,  and  that  according  to  my  ideas  the  big  criminals  should  wear 
striped  clothes  as  well  as  the  little  criminals.  I  want  to  say  to  you  that  I  be- 
lieve in  enforcing  the  law  against  all  classes  of  society,  and  those  who  believe  in 
that  policy  are  better  friends  of  the  Government  than  those  who  would  make 
scapegoats  of  little  criminals  and  then  let  the  big  ones  run  at  large  to  run  the 
Government  itself.  The  very  men  who  •  /ould  suffer  most  from  the  enforcement 
of  law  are  the  ones  who  seem  to  be  most  troubled.  They  are  not  afraid  that 
I  will  encourage  lawlessness,  but  they  know  that,  if  I  am  elected,  the  trusts 
will  not  select  the  Attorney  General. 

General  Otis  McG.  Howard,  editor  of  Farm,  Field  and  Fire- 
side, a  distinguished  soldier,  and  until  recently  a  Republican,  presided 
at  the  business  men's  meeting. 

During  that  day  I  also  made  two  addresses  to  women,  the  first  at 
St.  Stanislaus  Hall,  and  the  other  at  Battery  D.  At  four  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon  an  immense  meeting  was  held  at  the  Transit  House,  in  the 
Stock  Yards,  and  in  the  evening  some  eight  or  nine  meetings  on  the 
West  Side. 


590  THE  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN. 

The  forenoon  and  afternoon  of  Thursday  were  spent  in  a  trip 
through  the  Northern  part  of  the  State,  going  out  by  way  of  Elgin, 
Belvidere,  Rockford  and  Freeport,  and  returning  through  Dixon,  De 
Kalb   and  Wheaton. 

At  Elgin  I  explained  why  the  financiers  preferred  the  demonetiza- 
tion of  silver  to  the  demonetization  of  gold.  There  are  several  reasons : 
In  the  first  place,  the  plan  to  bring  the  world  to  monometallism  has  its 
center  in  London,  where  gold  is  the  standard,  and  it  was  natural  that 
those  most  interested  should  prefer  to  have  silver  demonetized  rather 
than  gold.  In  the  second  place,  when  silver  was  demonetized,  the  pro- 
duction of  silver  was  increasing  and  the  production  of  gold  was  decreas- 
ing. Therefore,  those  who  wanted  to  make  money  dearer,  knew  that  it 
was  safer  to  demonetize  silver  than  gold.  In  the  third  place,  a  larger 
proportion  of  the  annual  product  of  gold  than  of  the  annual  product  of 
silver  is  used  in  the  arts.  Hence,  the  demonetization  of  silver  material- 
ly lessens  the  quantity  of  metal  annually  available  for  coinage.  In  the 
fourth  place,  those  who  handle  large  sums  of  money  prefer  to  ship  gold 
rather  than  silver,  when  shipment  is  necessary.  While  any  one  of 
these  reasons  might  be  insufficient  in  itself  to  account  for  the  hostility 
to  silver,  the  four,  in  my  judgment,  enter  largely  into  the  calculation 
of  those  who  are  responsible  for  the  crusade  which  has  been  carried  on 
for  twenty  years  against  silver  as  a  standard  money. 

Some  eight  or  nine  meetings  were  arranged  for  the  evening,  the 
last  being  held  a  little  before  twelve  o'clock,  at  Brand's  Hall,  where 
Charles  Perry,  Esq.,  secretary  of  the  Carpenters'  International  Union, 
presented  some  engrossed  resolutions,  which  are  given  below: 

Resolutions  Presented  by  Carpenters'  International  Union. 

At  the  regular  meeting  of  the  Trade  Unionists'  Silver  Club  held  this  day 
the  following  resolutions  were  unanimously  adopted: 

Whereas,  in  order  to  the  maintenance  of  a  "government  of  the  people, 
by  the  people,  and  for  the  people,"  experience  has  demonstrated  that  it  is 
essential  that  those  charged  with  the  administration  of  the  Government  should 
not  only  be  men  of  unquestioned  ability  and  approved  courage  and  integrity, 
but  should  also  be  men  free  from  all  entangling  alliances  with  special  classes 
of  the  people,  and  without  obligations  to  persons  or  interest  which  may  tend 
to  impair  that  perfect  liberty  of  action  which  is  essential  to  the  full  and  un- 
hampered performance  of  duty  to  the  whole  people,  whether  such  obligations 
be  of  a  purely  personal  character,  or  whether  they  resuh  from  the  nature  and 
extent  of  the  support  furnished  in  the  progress  of  the  campaign;  and  whereas, 
we  recognize  in  William  J.  Bryan,  the  candidate  of  the  hosts  of  the  plain  peo- 
ple, battling  under  the  standard  of  Free  Silver  and  Reform,  for  liberty  and 


THB  CHICAGO  CAMPAIGN.  591 

humanity,  a  man  of  splendid  abilities,  of  tried  courage  and  of  unquestioned 
integrity  and  stainless  private  character,  who  owes  his  candidacy  to  no  special 
interest,  but  to  the  movement  in  behalf  of  the  whole  people,  who  is  free  from 
all  entangling  alliances  which  might  tend  to  fetter  his  actions  in  behalf  of  jus- 
tice and  the  commonweal,  and  who,  when  elected  to  the  Presidency  of  the 
United  States,  will  owe  that  election  to  the  manhood  suffrage  of  the  country 
and  not  to  money,  to  the  plain  people  and  not  the  plutocracy,  to  the  masses 
and  not  to  those  who  style  themselves  the  classes,  to  the  self-sacrificing  labors, 
the  loyal  support  and  the  enthusiastic  championship  of  the  hosts  who  labor, 
and  not  to  the  contributions  of  the  rich;  and  whereas,  being  thus  freely  called 
by  the  uncorrupted  suffrages  and  voluntary  choice  of  his  fellow-citizens  in  the 
Republic  to  the  performance  of  the  sacred  duties  of  the  most  exalted  office  in 
the  world,'  he  will  be  free  to  enter  upon  the  discharge  of  those  duties  without 
fear  of  favor,  and  with  no  other  obligation  than  that  of  conscience  to  work 
for  the  welfare  of  the  whole  land,  therefore. 

Resolved,  by  the  Trade  Unionists'  Silver  Club  of  Chicago,  That  we  pledge 
our  unwavering  and  loyal  support  in  this  campaign  to  William  Jennings  Bryan 
for  the  high  office  of  President  of  the  United  States  of  America,  believing  that  his 
election  will  be  conducive  to  the  general  welfare  of  our  beloved  country,  and 
will  surely  tend  to  the  establishment  of  better  financial  conditions  wherefrom 
the  toiling  masses  of  the  whole  world  will  derive  manifest  and  great  advantage. 

Resolved,  That  a  copy  of  this  minute  be  furnished  Mr.  Bryan,  to  evidence 
in  some  measure  our  esteem  for  him  as  a  citizen,  our  confidence  in  him  as  a 
leader  in  this  struggle  for  humanity  and  our  love  for  him  as  a  man. 

Dated  in  the  City  of  Chicago,  October  29th,  1896. 

O.  E.  Woodbury,  President.  H.  G.  Berry,  Secretary. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE: 

W.  T.  Sherman,  P.  J.  Dalton, 

S.  S.  Vaughn,  John  G.  Mitchell, 

Joseph  Daze,  Alfred  C.  Cattermull, 
Fred  H.  McManus. 

Hon.  Thomas  Gahan,  member  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the 
National  Democratic  Committee,  and  Robert  E.  Burke,  Esq.,  secretary 
of  the  Cook  County  Democratic  Committee,  were  with  me  at  all  of 
these  meetings,  and  others  joined  us  from  time  to  time.  Hon.  Joseph 
Martin,  candidate  for  Congress,  accompanied  us  on  several  occasions. 


CHAPTER   XLVIII. 


FROM    LAKE   MICHIGAN  TO    NEBRASKA. 

A  NIGHT'S  ride  from  Chicago  enabled  us  to  reach  Green  Bay, 
Wis.,  in  time  for  an  early  morning  meeting.  The  air  was 
cool,  and,  to  be  entirely  frank,  the  audience  at  first  shared 
somewhat  the  temperature  of  the  atmosphere,  but  warmed  up  as  the 
meeting  proceeded. 

We  made  short  stops  at  a  number  of  places,  prominent  among 
which  may  be  mentioned  Appleton,  Oshkosh,  Fond  du  Lac,  Water- 
town,  Jefferson,  Janesville  and  Madison.  At  Oshkosh  ex-Congressman 
Miller,  a  colleague  in  the  Fifty-second  Congress,  was  a  member  of 
the  Reception  Committee.  Hon.  James  Malone,  member  of  the  Demo- 
cratic Notification  Committee,  was  with  us  during  a  part  of  the  day, 
and  ex-Congressman  Clinton  Babbitt,  also  a  former  colleague,  was 
one  of  our  party  during  the  entire  day.  Our  host  upon  this  trip  was 
ex-Governor  Peck,  whose  sterling  qualities  and  genial  ways  have 
given  him  a  reputation  which  outshines,  if  possible,  the  reputation  of 
his  "Bad  Boy." 

,As  the  campaign  drew  to  a  close  the  canards  increased  in  number 
and  variety.  Natural  or  unnatural  deaths  had  terminated  the  careers 
of  cabinet  rumors,  of  stories  in  regard  to  promised  postoffice  appoint- 
ments and  employment  by  the  silver  barons,  and  last  of  all  the  report 
that  I  had  been  an  indifferent  performer  of  an  inferior  part  in  a  small 
theatrical  company.  But  now  religious  prejudices  were  appealed  to, 
and  I  was  accused  of  being  about  everything  which  anybody  could  find 
fault  with.  As  an  illustration  of  the  conflicting  charges  I  might  add 
that  I  received  on  the  same  day  two  letters,  one  announcing  that  a 
newspaper  had  charged  specifically  that  I  was  a  member  of  a  certain 
lodge  or  council  of  the  American  Protective  Association,  and  the  other 
calling  attention  to  the  circulation  of  a  statement  accusing  me  of  un- 
friendliness to  public  schools.  Learning  that  these  charges,  circulat- 
ing generally  by  word  of  mouth  rather  than  through  the  papers,  were 
influencing  the  opinions  of  some,  and  knowing  that  time  did  not  permit 
correction  through  ordinary  channels,  I  gave  out  during  the  day  an 
interview  upon  the  subject  and  afterward  embodied  it  in  my  speech 
at  Madison.     It  will  be  found  below: 

592 


FROM  LAKE  MICHIGAN  TO  NEBRASKA,  593 

Madison  Speech. 

I  have  not  attempted  to  answer  all  of  the  misrepresentations  which  have  been 
circulated  in  this  campaign,  but  in  the  closing  days  I  feel  that  it  is  necessary  to 
call  your  attention  to  an  attack  which  has  recently  been  made  by  the  enemy.  I  find 
that  the  Republicans  are  circulating  among  Catholic  citizens  the  charge  that 
I  am  or  have  been  a  member  of  the  American  Protective  Association.  I  have 
also  learned  that  i  have  been  accused  of  being  a  member  of  a  society  which  I 
think  is  known  as  the  Junior  Order  of  American  Mechanics.  At  the  same  time 
I  have  been  accused  in  other  quarters  of  being  opposed  to  the  public  school 
system  and  of  having  voted  against  the  teaching  of  the  English  language  in  the 
public  schools  of  New  Mexico.  While  I  have  attempted  to  confine  my  discus- 
sion of  public  issue  to  the  questions  raised  by  my  platform,  and  have  con- 
sidered the  money  question  as  paramount  to  all  others,  I  take  this  opportunity 
to  explain  my  position  upon  the  religious  controversy  which  has  been  raised, 
and  ask  the  press  associations  to  give  the  matter  publicity. 

I  am  not  and  never  have  been  a  member  of  the  American  Protective  Asso- 
ciation or  of  the  Junior  Order  of  American  Mechanics,  or  of  any  other  society 
hostile  to  any  church,  religion  or  race;  nor  have  I  ever  applied  for  membership 
in  any  such  organization.  While  I  am  a  member  of  the  Presbyterian  church,  I 
have  always  believed  that  there  should  be  no  religious  test  applied  in  the  hold- 
ing of  public  office,  and  I  have  not  allowed  religious  differences  to  aflfect  my 
conduct  in  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  public  office.  I  am  a  believer  in  the 
public  school  system.  I  attended  public  schools  myself  and  my  children  are 
now  attending  public  schools.  While  I  recognize  the  right  of  parents  to 
send  their  children  to  private  schools  and  colleges,  if  they  so  desire,  I  believe 
that  the  free  public  school  must  remain  a  part  of  our  system  of  government  in 
order  that  the  means  of  education  shall  be  within  the  reach  of  every  child  in  the 
land.  The  Democratic  members  of  Congress  voted  against  a  proposed  amend- 
ment to  the  constitution  of  New  Mexico  which  compelled  the  teaching  of  the 
English  language  in  the  public  schools,  not  because  the  Democrats  were  op- 
posed to  public  schools,  or  to  the  teaching  of  the  English  language  in  such 
schools,  but  because  they  did  not  deem  it  necessary  or  wise  to  require  a  pledge 
from  the  people  of  New  Mexico  which  had  not  been  required  of  the  people  of 
the  other  Territories  seeking  admission.  I  trust  that  what  I  now  say  may  reach 
all  of  the  voters,  because  it  is  the  only  opportunity  I  shall  have  of  meeting  these 
misrepresentations.  I  trust  that  those  who  support  the  policies  set  forth  in  the 
Democratic  platform  will  not  allow  themselves  to  be  alienated  from  my  support 
by  any  affidavits  which  may  be  circulated  by  political  enemies.  I  have  tried  so 
far  as  I  could  to  conduct  this  campaign  in  an  open  and  honorable  way,  and  have 
insisted  that  those  who  are  with  us  should  refrain  from  personal  criticism  of 
my  opponent  and  leave  the  people  to  pass  judgment  upon  the  principles  which 
we  represent. 

At  Monroe  we  bade  adieu  to  Wisconsin,  and,  crossing  through  Illi- 
nois, began  Saturday  at  Mt.  Pleasant,  Iowa.  The  next  meeting  was  at 
Ottumwa,  where  great  enthusiasm  was  manifested.  The  presiding 
officer  was  Hon.  Fred  White,  ex-Congressman  from  the  Ottumwa  dis- 


594  FROM  LAKE  MICHIGAN  TO  NEBRASKA. 

trict,  who  had  the  honor  of  placing  Mr.  Boies  in  nomination  at  the  Chi- 
cago convention.     The  following  is  the  Ottumwa  speech  in  full : 

Ottumwa  Speech. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen:  We  are  now  at  the  close  of  a 
memorable  campaign,  a  campaign  in  which  greater  issues  are  involved  than 
were  ever  involved  in  any  previous  campaign  in  the  United  States  in  time  of 
peace,  a  campaign  which  has  aroused  a  deeper  feeling  than  has  been  aroused 
by  any  previous  campaign  in  time  of  peace,  a  campaign  which  has  witnessed 
more  unselfish  devotion  to  a  cause  than  has  ever  been  witnessed  in  any  previ- 
ous campaign  in  time  of  peace.  Men  who  had  never  spoken  before  in  pub- 
lic have  gone  forth  in  this  campaign  because  their  hearts  were  so  full  of  the 
truth  that  they  could  not  keep  silent.  If  they  had  taken  from  us  every  man 
who  had  made  a  public  speech  before,  we  would  have  had  sufficient  of  public 
speaking  from  these  new  men  who  have  demonstrated  that  eloquence  is  the 
speech  of  one  who  knows  what  he  is  talking  about  and  believes  what  he  says. 

The  time  has  now  come  for  you  to  sit  in  judgment  as  sovereigns  of  the 
greatest  nation  on  the  earth,  and  all  that  we  ask  of  you  is  that  you  make  your 
votes  represent  what  you  believe. 

The  cause  of  bimetallism  has  grown  every  day  of  this  campaign.  There 
has  not  been  a  single  moment  when  there  was  a  cessation  in'  the  progress  of 
the  cause,  and  why?  Because  our  cause  is  just  and  our  arguments  unanswer- 
able. I  claim  no  credit  for  the  work  that  has  been  done;  bimetallism  has  not 
grown  because  I  have  advocated  it,  but  because  it  appeals  to  all.  Our  oppo- 
nents have  accused  us  of  arraying  class  against  class,  yet  to  them  belongs  the 
discredit  of  making  more  appeals  to  class  and  sectional  prejudices  than  any 
other  party  has  ever  made.  They  have  tried  to  array  the  money  leaner 
against  the  man  who  borrows  money;  they  have  tried  to  array  the  merchant 
against  his  customers;  they  have  tried  to  array  the  wage  earners  against  the 
farmer;  they  have  tried  to  array  the  financiers  against  the  rest  of  the  people; 
they  have  tried  to  array  the  soldiers  against  their  country.  There  is  not  a 
class  to  which  they  have  not  appealed.  Aye,  they  have  even  gone  into  religion 
and  have  appealed  to  missionary  societies  and  to  church  boards,  and  have 
told  them  that  the  free  coinage  of  silver  would  lessen  the  value  of  their  invest- 
ments. 

My  friends,  our  appeal  has  been  to  the  great  producing  masses  and  to 
those  who  believe  that  the  prosperity  of  the  nation  must  begin  with  those 
who  toil  and  find  its  way  upward  through  the  other  classes  of  society.  We 
have  tried  to  apply  the  doctrine  of  bimetallism  to  all  of  the  people,  and  we 
insist  that  there  is  only  one  class  which  profits  by  the  gold  standard,  and  that 
is  the  class  which  owns  money,  and  trades  in  money,  and  grows  rich  as  the 
people  grow  poor. 

Bimetallism  appeals  to  the  farmers  because  they  have  suffered  from  falling 
prices  while  their  debts  and  taxes  have  refused  to  fall.  We  want  to  restore 
bimetallism  and  then  maintain  the  parity  between  the  dollar  and  property. 
Bimetallism  appeals  to  the  wage  earner  because  it  makes  it  more  profitable 
to  invest  money  in  enterprises  and  in  the  employment  of  labor  than  to  lock 


FROM  LAKE  MICHIGAN  TO  NEBRASKA.  595 

it  up  in  a  vault  and  gain  the  rise  in  the  value  of  dollars.  Bimetallism  gives  to 
the  laboring  man  an  opportunity  to  work,  and  we  point  to  the  fact  that  in  all 
the  times  past,  laboring  men  have  been  more  prosperous  when  two  jobs  of 
work  were  looking  for  one  man  when  two  men  were  looking  for  one  job 
of  work. 

Bimetallism  appeals  to  the  business  man  because  business  failures  every- 
where testify  to  the  fact  that  the  merchant  cannot  sell  when  the  people  are  not 
able  to  buy.  We  want  to  increase  the  consuming  capacity  of  the  American 
people  by  having  money  in  the  country  for  them  to  obtain  when  they  sell  their 
crops  and  for  them  to  spend  in  the  purchase  of  food  and  clothing  for  their 
families. 

The  gold  standard  has  separated  the  mouth  from  the  money  to  buy  food  for 
it;  it  has  separated  the  back  to  be  clothed  from  the  purse  that  contains  the 
money  to  buy  the  clothing.  We  want  to  close  the  gap  between  gold  and 
silver  and,  by  so  doing,  close  the  gap  between  the  needs  of  the  human  race 
and  the  money  required  to  satisfy  those  needs.  Bimetallism  appeals  to  the 
professional  man  because  the  professional  man  lives  upon  those  who  produce 
the  wealth  of  the  country  and  upon  those  who  exchange  wealth;  and  if  he 
destroys  the  foundation  he  destroys  his  own  prosperity.  Bimetallism  appeals 
to  the  soldier;  the  soldier  who  was  willing  to  give  his  life,  if  need  be,  to  make 
this  one  nation,  is  willing  to  give  his  vote  this  year  to  make  this  nation  an 
independent  nation  rather  than  the  province  of  some  foreign  empire. 

Our  cause  appeals  to  the  minds  of  those  who  think  and  to  the  hearts  of 
those  who  feel,  while  the  gold  standard,  when  rightly  understood,  appeals 
only  to  those  who  love  money  more  than  they  do  mankind. 

I  want  you  to  remember  that  no  evil  was  ever  reformed  by  those  who 
profited  by  the  evil;  that  no  bad  law  was  ever  repealed  by  those  who  ob- 
tained the  benefits  of  the  bad  law;  that  no  vicious  system  was  ever  corrected 
by  those  who  profited  by  the  vicious  system;  and  so,  in  this  campaign,  the 
people  who  have  grown  rich  from  the  gold  standard  having  banded  them- 
selves together  to  maintain  it,  we  must  appeal  to  those  who  have  suffered  in 
order  to  obtain  relief  from  the  gold  standard.  We  have  been  making  an  appeal 
to  the  people  of  this  country  and  I  have  tried  to  do  my  share  of  the  work.  I 
have  worked  as  hard  as  I  could,  and  yet  I  do  not  want  you  to  think  that  my 
physical  strength  is  exhausted. 

My  hand  has  been  used  until  it  is  sore,  but  it  can  handle  a  pen  to  sign  a 
free-coinage  bill,  if  I  am  elected.  I  have  been  wearied  with  work,  but  I  still 
have  the  physical  strength  to  stand  between  the  people,  if  they  elect  me,  and 
the  Wall  street  syndicates  which  have  been  bleeding  this  country. 

My  friends,  you  have  been  told  that  I  am  a  dangerous  man.  There  is 
nothing  in  my  past  life,  either  public  or  private,  that  justifies  any  citizen  in 
saying  that  my  election  would  be  a  menace  to  law  and  order,  or  to  our  form 
of  government,  or  to  the  welfare  of  society;  but  there  is  much  in  what  I  have 
said  and  done  to  create  a  suspicion  that  my  election  would  le  a  menace  to 
those  who  have  been  living  on  what  other  people  have  earned. 

I  believe  in  the  cause  for  which  I  speak.  I  have  never  claimed  infalli- 
bility, but  when  T  believe  a  thing  I  stand  by  it.  And  I  believe  in  the  restora- 
tion of  bimetallism,  and  if  I  have  behind  me  the  hearts,  as  well  as  the  votes, 

34 


596  FROM  LAKE  MICHIGAN  TO  NEBRASKA. 

of  the  American  people,  you  may  depend  upon  it  that  no  power  in  this  coun- 
try or  in  any  other  nation  will  prevent  the  opening  of  our  mints  to  the  free 
coinage  of  silver  on  equal  terms  with  gold,  and  at  the  present  ratio. 

I  appreciate  the  work  that  has  been  done  in  this  campaign;  I  appreciate 
the  words  that  have  been  spoken,  the  zeal  which  has  been  shown,  and  the 
sacrifices  which  have  been  made,  and  I  appreciate  the  efforts  which  have  been 
put  forth  by  the  wives  and  mothers,  as  well  as  the  work  done  by  the  men. 
The  wives  and  mothers  have  a  right  to  feel  an  interest  in  the  result  of  this 
campaign;  they  are  concerned  as  much  as  we.  There  is  no  question  which 
appeals  to  the  mother's  heart  more  than  the  question  raised  in  this  campaign, 
namely,  whether  the  trusts  and  syndicates  shall  run  this  government,  or 
whether  the  people  themselves  shall  have  a  voice  in  the  making  of  the  laws. 

They  have  accused  me  of  being  a  young  man  and  I  have  not  attempted  to 
deny  it.  But,  my  friends,  as  a  young  man  I  know  something  of  the  feelings 
of  young  men,  and  I  know  what  it  is  to  have  a  condition  in  our  political 
society  that  makes  it  difficult  for  a  young  man  to  rise  in  life  unless  he  becomes 
a  favorite  of  some  great  corporation.  I  want  our  government  maintained  as 
the  fathers  intended  it.  I  want  it  so  that  the  child  of  the  humblest  citizen  in 
this  land  can  aspire  to  any  position  in  the  political  or  business  world  to  which 
his  merits  entitle  him.  I  want  it  so  that  if  he  enters  politics  he  will  not  find 
arrayed  against  him  all  the  great  financial  influences  of  society  unless  he  is 
willing  to  join  with  them  and  conspire  against  the  welfare  of  the  people  as  a 
whole.  If  he  enters  business  I  want  him  to  be  able  to  stand  upon  his  own 
merits  and  not  stand  always  in  the  fear  that  some  great  trust  will  run  him 
out  of  business. 

We  are  engaged  in  just  such  a  contest  as  every  generation  must  pass 
through.  In  times  of  quiet,  abuses  spring  up.  When  the  people  neglect  their 
civil  duties  those  who  have  great  interests  at  stake  gather  around  legislative 
halls  and  secure  legislation  that  grants  them  special  privileges,  and  then  they 
entrench  themselves  behind  the  privileges  granted  them  and  contribute  to 
campaign  funds  in  order  to  purchase  an  election,  knowing  that  they  can  get 
back  through  unjust  legislation  more  than  they  contribute  to  the  campaign 
fund.  The  people  suffer  until  suffering  ceases  to  be  a  virtue;  they  are  patient 
until  patience  is  exhausted,  and  then  they  arouse  themselves,  take  the  reins 
of  government  and  put  the  government  back  upon  its  old  foundation. 

We  are  engaged  in  such  a  struggle  now,  and  while  the  election  will  turn 
upon  the  money  question,  yet  behind  the  money  question  stand  other  ques- 
tions, and  behind  the  money  power  stand  all  those  combinations  which  have 
been  using  the  government  for  public  plunder.  I  know  that  the  forces  against 
us  are  great,  but,  my  friends,  the  conscience  of  the  American  people  is  more 
potent  than  any  campaign  fund  that  can  be  raised. 

I  am  not  surprised  at  the  means  which  have  been  employed,  because 
when  a  party  starts  out  with  the  proposition  that  we  must  submit  to  such  a 
financial  system  as  money  lenders  demand,  they  go  further  and  say  that  any 
man  who  borrows  money  must  submit  to  dictation  from  the  man  who  loans 
to  him,  and  that  any  man  who  works  for  wages  must  submit  to  dictation  from 
the  man  who  employs  him.     This  doctrine  of  submission   will  be  carried  all 


FROM  LAKE  MICHIGAN  TO  NEBRASKA.  597 

the  way  down  the  line  until  the  right  of  the  citizen  is  lost  and  until  the  cor- 
poration becomes  all-powerful. 

The  yellow  ribbon  which  was  first  adopted  as  a  badge  of  submission  to  a 
foreign  money  power  has  become  a  badge  of  coercion.  Let  those  wear  it 
who  are  willing  to  bow  the  knee  and  supplicate  for  assistance  from  across  the 
ocean.  I  expect  the  votes  of  those  only  who  believe  that  the  American  people 
are  able  to  attend  to  their  own  business.  Let  those  wear  the  yellow  ribbon  who 
are  willing  to  submit  the  destinies  of  this  nation  to  those  who  loan  us  money. 
I  expect  the  votes  of  those  only  who  want  to  commit  the  destinies  of  70,000,000 
of  people  to  those  people  themselves.  We  simply  ask  you  who  live  upon  these 
prairies  and  in  these  cities  to  be  as  independent  in  the  casting  of  your  votes 
as  the  eastern  financier  is  when  he  casts  his  vote.  He  tells  you  that  he  is  a 
business  man  and  cannot  allow  party  questions  to  interfere  with  business.  1 
want  you  to  be  business  men  in  this  campaign.  From  now  until  election  day 
carry  as  your  motto:  "We  mean  business,"  and  bimetallism  will  be  restored. 

The  rest  of  the  day  was  spent  in  a  trip  through  Iowa,  with  meetings 
at  the  important  cities,  among  them  being  Chariton,  Creston,  Red  Oak, 
Hastings  and  Council  Bluffs.  There  were  three  large  and  enthusiastic 
meetings  at  the  latter  place.  At  Creston  also  there  were  three  meetings, 
one  of  them  being  for  ladies  exclusively.  Mr,  Walsh,  Secretary  of  the 
National  Committee,  accompanied  us  on  the  trip  through  Wisconsin 
and  Iowa,  and  Father  Nugent,  of  Des  Moines,  who  made  several  strong 
speeches  during  the  campaign,  was  with  us  during  a  part  of  the  ride 
through  the  latter  State.  Hon.  Lew  Genung,  a  delegate  to  the  Chi- 
cago convention,  and  later  fusion  candidate  for  Congress  in  the  Council 
Bluffs  district,  joined  us  at  Pacific  Junction  and  attended  the  evening 
meetings.  At  Council  Bluffs  Mrs.  Bryan  and  I  were  the  guests  of  Mr. 
Evans,  one  of  the  most  zealous  of  the  Iowa  silver  Republicans. 

Crossing  the  river  early  Sunday  morning,  we  reached  Lincoln  about 
ten  o'clock  and  spent  the  remainder  of  the  Sabbath  at  home. 

This  ended  the  long  trip  of  the  campaign.  Below  will  be  found  in 
detail  the  distances  and  route  traveled: 

Mileage  on  Third  Trip. 

Miles. 

Lincoln  to  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  over  Missouri  Pacific 201 

Kansas  City  to  St.  Louis,  over  Wabash 277 

St.  Louis  to  Henderson,  Ky.,  over  L.  &  N I7S 

Henderson  to  Louisville,  Ky.,  over  Louisville,  St.  Louis  &  Texas.  142 

Louisville  to  Midway,  Ky.,  over  L.  &  N 80 

Midway  to  Versailles,   Ky.,   over  Southern   Railway 7 

Versailles  to  Lexington,  Ky.,  over  Southern  Railway 14 

Lexington  to  Maysville,  Ky..  and  return,  over  Kentucky  Central  138 

Lexington  to  Harriman,  Tenn.,  over  Southern 172 


598  FROM  LAKE  MICHIGAN  TO  NEBRASKA. 

Miles. 

Harriman  to  Asheville,   N.   C,   over  Southern 132 

Asheville  to  Charlotte,  N.  C,  over  Southern 160 

Charlotte  to  Greensboro,   N.   C,   over  Southern    93 

Greensboro  to   Goldsboro,   N.   C,   over   Southern 130 

Goldsboro  to  Weldon,  N.  C,  over  Wilmington  &  Weldon 77 

Weldon  to  Washington,  D.  C,  over  A.  C 200 

Washington  to  Baltimore,  over  Pennsylvania 43 

Baltimore  to  Washington  and  return,  over  Pennsylvania 86 

Baltimore  to    Newark   Center,    Del.,    over    Pennsylvania 57 

Newark  Center  to  Porter,  Del.,  over  Pennsylvania   7 

Porter  to   Dover,    Del.,  over   Pennsylvania 34 

Dover  to   Wilmington,   Del.,   over   Pennsylvania 48 

Wilmington  to  Philadelphia,  over  Pennsylvania 27 

Philadelphia  to  Trenton,   N.  J.,  over  Pennsylvania    34 

Trenton  to  Manunka  Chunk,  over  Pennsylvania 78 

Manunka  Chunk  to  New  York,   over  D.,   L.   &  W 77 

New  York  to  Boston,  over  N.  Y.,  N.  H.  &  H.  R 234 

Boston  to  Manchester,  N.  H.,  over  B.  &  M 57 

Manchester  to  Lawrence,   Mass.,  over  B.   &  M 27 

Lawrence  to   Bath,    Me 128 

Bath   to   Boston,   over   B.    &   M 146 

Boston  to  New  York,  over  N.  Y.,  N.  H.  &  H.  R 232 

New  York  to  Parkersburg,  W.  Va.,   over  B.   &  0 572 

Parkersburg  to  Wheeling,  W.  Va.,  over  Ohio  Railroad 94 

Wheeling  to  Point  Pleasant,  W.  Va.,  over  Ohio  Railroad 172 

Point  Pleasant  to  Charleston,  W.  Va.,  over  Ohio  Central  Lines..  56 

Charleston  to  Cincinnati,  over  C.  &  0 211 

Cincinnati  to  St.  Louis,  over  B.  &    O.    S.  W 341 

St.  Louis  to  Memphis,  Tenn.,  over  Illinois  Central 312 

Memphis  to  McKenzie,  Tenn.,  over  L.  &  N 113 

McKenzie  to  Nashville,  Tenn.,  over  N.  C.  &  St.  L 117 

Nashville  to  Louisville,  Ky.,  over  L.   &  N 186 

Louisville  to  Chicago,  over  P.,  C,  C.  &  St.  L 304 

Chicago  to   Burlington,   la.,   over  C,   B.   &  Q 206 

Burlington  to  Cedar  Rapids,  la.,  over  B.,  C.   R.   &  N 98 

Cedar  Rapids  to  Sioux  City,  la.,  over  N.  &  N.  W 297 

Sioux  City  to  Sioux  Falls,  S.  D.,  over  C,  M.  &  St.  P 91 

Sioux  Falls  to  Aberdeen,  S.  D.,  over  C.  &  N.  W 197 

Aberdeen  to  Fargo,  N.  D.,  over  Great  Northern 182 

Fargo  to   St.    Paul,    Minn.,   over   Great   Northern 259 

St.   Paul  to  Duluth,  Minn.,  over  N.  P 290 

Duluth  to  Saxon,  Mich.,  over  D.,  S.  S.   &  A 103 

Saxon  to  Negaunee,  Mich.,  over  C.  &  N.  W 265 

Negaunee  to  St.  Ignace,  Mich.,  over  D.,  S.  S.  &  A 163 

St.  Ignace  to  Mackinaw  City,  Mich.,  over  M.  T.  Co 7 

Mackinaw  City  to  Petoskey.  Mich.,  over  G.  R.  &  1 35 

Petoskey  to  Traverse  City,  Mich.,  over  C.  &  W.  M 77 


FROM  LAKE  MICHIGAN  TO  NEBRASKA.  599 

Miles. 

Traverse  City  to  Howard  City,  Mich.,  over  G.  R.  &  I in 

Howard  City  to  Ionia,  Mich.,  over  D.,  L.  &  N 38 

Ionia  to  Grand  Rapids,  Mich.,  over  D.,  G.  H.  &  M 34 

Grand  Rapids  to  St.  Joe,  Mich.,  over  C.  &  W.  M 88 

St.  Joe  to  Niles,  Mich.,  over  C,  C,  C.  &  St.  L 24 

Niles  to  Owosso,  Mich.,  over  Michigan  Central 180 

Owosso  to  Flint,  Mich.,  over  D.,  G.  H.  &  M 67 

Flint  to  Bay  City,   Mich.,  over  F.   &  P.   M 45 

Bay  City  to  Lapeer,  over  Michigan  Central 49 

Lapeer  to  Detroit,  over  C.   &  G.  T 105 

Detroit   to   Toledo,    O.,    over    Michigan    Central 60 

Toledo  to  Hamilton,  O.,  over  C,  H.  &  D 177 

Hamilton  to  Dayton,  O.,  over  C,  H.  &  D 34 

Dayton  to  Washington,  O.,  over  C,  H.  &  D 49 

Washington  to  Zanesville,  O.,  over  C.   &  M.  V 89 

Zanesville  to  Bellaire,  O.,  over  B.  &  0 78 

Bellaire  to  Rochester,   Pa.,   over   Pennsylvania 69 

Rochester  to  Alliance,   O.,  over  Pennsylvania    67 

Alliance  to   Ravenna,   O.,   over  Pennsylvania 19 

Ravenna  to  Akron,  O.,  over  Pittsburg  &  Western 19 

Akron  to  Medina,  O.,  over  Northern  Ohio 22 

Medina  to  Elyria,  O.,  over  C,  L.  &  W 26 

Elyria  to  Sandusky,  O.,  over  L.  S.  &  M.  S 40 

Sandusky  to  Urbana,  O.,  over  C,  C,  C.  &  St.  L 164 

TJrbana  to  Richmond,   Ind.,  over  Pennsylvania   79 

Richmond  to  Newcastle,  Ind.,  over  P.,  C,  C.  &  St.  L 27 

Newcastle  to  Muncie,   Ind.,  over  Ft.  W.,   C.   &  L 18 

Muncie  to  Anderson,  Ind.,  over  C,  C,  C.  &  St.  L 18 

Anderson  to  Marion,   Ind.,  over  C,  W.   &  M 32 

Marion  to  Bluflfton,  Ind.,  over  T.,  St.  L.  &  K.  C 30 

Bluffton  to  Fort  Wayne,  Ind.,  over  Ft.  W.,  C.  &  L 25 

Fort  Wayne  to  Decatur,  Ind.,  over  G.  R.  &  1 21 

Decatur  to  Rochester,  Ind.,  over  C.  &.  E 72 

Rochester  to   Peru,   Ind.,   over  L.   E.   &  W 24 

Peru  to  Delphi,  Ind.,  over  Wabash 36 

Delphi  to  Frankfort,  Ind.,  over  L.,  N.  A.   &  C 25 

Frankfort  to  Lafayette,  Ind.,  over  L.  E.  &  W 24 

Lafayette  to  Greencastle,  Ind.,  over  L.,  N.  A.  &  C 59 

Greencastle  to  Paris,  111.,  over  C,  C,  C.  &  St.  L 48 

Paris  to  Danville,  111.,  and  return,  over  C,  C,  C.  &  St.  L 75 

Paris  to  Mattoon,  111.,  over  C,  C,  C.  &  St.  L 37 

Mattoon  to  Decatur,   111.,  over  P.  D.   &  E 42 

Decatur  to  Springfield,  III.,  over  Wabash 41 

Springfield  to  Peoria,  111.,  over  C,  P.  &  St.  L 87 

Peoria  to   Ottawa,   111.,   over   C,   R.   I.    &  P • 87 

Ottawa  to  LaSalle,  111.,  over  C,  R.  I.  &  P iS 

LaSalle  to  Rock  Island,  111.,  ever  C,  B.  &  Q "S 


600 


FROM  LAKE  MICHIGAN  TO  NEBRASKA.  601 

Miles. 

Rock  Island  to  Quincy,  111.,  over  C,  B.  &  Q 164 

Quincy  to  Jacksonville,  111.,  over  Wabash 78 

Jacksonville  to  Alton,    111.,   over   C.    &  A 67 

Alton  to  Chicago,  over  C.   &  A 282 

Chicago  to  Freeport,  111.,  over  C.  &  N.  W 121 

Freeport  to  Dixon,  111.,  over  C.  &  N.  W 36 

Dixon  to  Chicago,  over  C.   &  N.  W 98 

Chicago  to  Green  Bay,  Wis.,  over  C.  &  N.  W 211 

Green  Bay  to  Janesville,  Wis.,  over  C.  &  N.  W 151 

Janesville  to  Madison,  Wis.,  over  C.  &  N.  W 48 

Madison  to  Galena,  111.,  over  Illinois  Central 114 

Galena   to   Burlington,   la.,   over   C,    B.    &   Q 163 

Burlington  to  Council  Bluffs,  la.,  over  C,  B.  &  Q 293 

Council  Bluffs  to  Omaha,   Neb.,  by  carriage 4 

Omaha  to  Lmcoln,   Neb.,  over  B.   &  M 55 

By  carriage  at  various  places  (estimated) 300 

Total  number  miles  traveled,  third  trip 12,837 


CHAPTER   XLIX. 


MY    LABORS    ENDED. 

BRIGHT  and  early  Monday  morning-,  November  2d,  we  started 
on  the  last  trip  of  the  campaign.  Besides  our  daughter  Grace, 
who  was  with  us  until  we  left  for  Omaha,  and  the  newspaper 
reporters,  my  wife  and  I  were  accompanied  by  Chairman  Dahlman, 
of  the  Democratic  State  Committee,  and  from  time  to  time  by  promi- 
nent Democrats,  Populists  and  silver  Republicans,  who  participated  in 
the  meetings  along  the  road.  Mr.  Edward  Bignell,  of  the  Burlington, 
had  charge  of  our  train.  We  went  to  Grand  Island,  probably  the  most 
westerly  point  made  during  the  campaign,  then  coming  back  to  Au- 
rora, proceeded  to  Hastings,  almost  as  far  West,  and  then  returned  to 
Lincoln  through  Harvard,  Sutton,  Fairmount,  Exeter,  Friend  and 
Crete,  at  all  of  which  places,  and  at  some  smaller  ones,  speeches  were 
made.  The  largest  crowd  was  at  Hastings,  and  everywhere  the  at- 
tendance was  proportionate  to  the  size  of  the  town.  The  Republicans 
were  out  in  large  numbers  and  all  wore  yellow  ribbons.  The  presence 
of  this  color  in  an  agricultural  State  gave  me  an  opportunity  to  suggest 
that  the  Repubhcan  farmers  ought  to  wear  a  bunch  of  straw  as  an 
emblem,  if  they  wanted  to  wear  yellow,  because  this  would  not  only 
give  them  the  color  they  desired,  but  would  also  declare  their  devotion 
to  a  financial  system  which  had  turned  over  the  wheat  to  the  financiers 
of  Wall  street  and  left  the  straw  for  the  farmers. 

The  meetings  were  so  short  that  no  extended  argument  was  pos- 
sible, but  I  epitomized  the  issues  in  the  statement  that,  as  the  Re- 
publicans promised  to  continue  the  present  financial  policy,  which  had 
resulted  in  an  issue  of  bonds  and  in  the  locking  up  of  a  large  amount 
of  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  in  the  vaults  at  Washington,  while 
we  desired  to  keep  the  greenbacks  and  Treasury  notes  in  circulation 
and  prevent  an  increase  in  the  bonded  debt,  the  question  was  whether 
we  should  have  more  bonds  and  less  money  in  circulation,  or  more 
money  in  circulation  and  less  bonds. 

In  accordance  with  a  nice  sense  of  propriety,  the  last  farce  of  the 
campaign  waged  by  the  bolting  Democrats  was  enacted  upon  Ne- 
braska soil,  where  they  first  separated  themselves  from  the  Democratic 
party.    A  number  of  prominent  administration  Democrats  made  up 

602 


MY  LABORS  ENDED.  603 

the  party  on  this  occasion,  and  Hon.  John  P,  Irish,  collector  of  customs 
at  the  port  of  San  Francisco,  delivered  the  final  warning  against 
"repudiation,  national  dishonor  and  anarchy." 

When  we  reached  Lincoln  we  were  taken  to  the  Lincoln  Hotel  and 
I  delivered  a  brief  address  to  a  large  crowd.  We  then  proceeded  to 
Omaha,  stopping  at  Greenwood,  Ashland  and  Gretna.  It  was  at  the 
last-named  place  that  I  opened  my  first  Congressional  campaign  in 
1890,  it  being  then  the  strongest  Democratic  precinct  in  the  only 
Democratic  county  in  the  district.  My  first  visit  to  Gretna  was  sig- 
nalized by  the  raising  of  a  pole,  and  beneath  the  flag  there  floated 
upon  the  breeze  "a  banner  with  this  strange  device" — "W.  J.  Bryan, 
M.  C."  This  might  then  be  called  a  strange  device,  because  but  few 
thought  my  election  possible. 

There  were  seven  meetings  in  Omaha.  The  last  one  was  held  at 
the  Creighton  Theater,  owned  by  and  named  after  the  Nebraska  mem- 
ber of  the  Democratic  Notification  Committee,  an  ardent  supporter, 
who  traveled  with  us  from  the  Missouri  to  the  Atlantic  in  order  to  take 
part  in  the  initial  meeting  of  the  campaign.  This  closing  speech  was 
made  a  few  minutes  before  12  o'clock,  and  brought  to  a  termination  the 
labors  of  the  last  day,  of  which  nearly  eighteen  hours  were  employed 
in  campaigning.  Taking  the  shorter  speeches  into  the  calculation,  I 
believe  I  addressed  twenty-seven  audiences,  the  greatest  number  ad- 
dressed in  any  one  day  during  the  campaign.  At  several  places  the 
women's  clubs  took  part.  When  I  entered  Creighton  Theater  Hon. 
Silas  A.  Holcomb,  then  Governor,  and  the  next  day  re-elected,  was 
making  his  last  campaign  speech ;  he  introduced  me  to  the  audience. 

The  campaign  was  over,  and  its  conclusion  brought  to  me  a  sense 
of  relief.  No  matter  what  the  result  might  be,  I  felt  I  had  done  all 
within  my  power  to  bring  success  to  the  principles  for  which  I  stood, 
and  that  however  small  my  contribution  to  the  cause  might  have  been, 
I  could  expect  the  same  commendation  which,  the  Bible  tells  us,  was 
accorded  to  the  woman  who  had  done  what  she  could. 

The  following  morning  we  returned  to  Lincoln  on  an  early  train. 
The  Bryan  Home  Guards  met  us  at  the  depot  and  escorted  me  to  the 
city  clerk's  office,  where  I  made  the  affidavit  required  of  those  who  fail 
to  register,  and  then  they  accompanied  me  to  the  polling  place,  where 
I  deposited  my  ballot.  Just  as  I  was  about  to  vote,  one  of  the  strong- 
est Republicans  of  the  precinct,  then  acting  as  a  challenger  for  his 
party,  suggested  that  as  a  mark  of  respect  to  their  townsman  they  take 
off  their  hats.     The  suggestion  was  adopted  by  all  excepting  one.     I 


604  MY  LABORS  ENDED. 

relate  this  incident  because,  althoug-h  the  compliment  was  somewhat 
embarrassing  at  the  time,  I  appreciated  it,  as  it  showed  the  personal 
good  will  which,  as  a  rule,  was  manifested  towards  me  in  my  home  city 
by  those  who  did  not  agree  with  me  on  political  questions. 

The  Home  Guards  took  me  to  the  door  of  my  house,  where  I 
thanked. them  for  the  consideration  which  they  had  shown,  and  the 
sacrifices  which  they  made  during  the  campaign.  I  may  add  here  that 
I  am  proud  of  the  Bryan  Home  Guards.  During  my  travels  I  met  no 
better  disciplined  club.  They  marched  with  the  precision  of  veterans 
and  were  always  ready  for  duty. 

Mileage  on  Fourth  Trip. 

Miles. 

Lincoln  to  Grand  Island,  Neb.,  over  B.  &  M 92 

Grand  Island  to  Hastings,  Neb.,  via  Aurora,  over  B.  &  M 46 

Hastings  to  Omaha,  Neb.,  over  B.   &  M 151 

Omaha  to  Lincoln,  Neb.,  over  B.   &  M 55 

Total  number  miles  traveled,  fourth  trip 344 

Total  number  miles  traveled  on  four  trips 18,009 


CHAPTER  L 


THE  ELECTION  RETURNS. 

WHEN  necessity  no  longer  spurred  me  to  exertion,  I  began  to 
feel  the  effects  of  long  continued  labor  and  sought  rest  in 
bed.  As  soon  as  the  polls  were  closed  the  representatives 
of  the  press,  drawn  by  friendliness  and  enterprise,  assembled  in  the 
library  below  to  analyze  the  returns,  while  Mrs,  Bryan  brought  the 
more  important  bulletins  to  my  room — her  face  betraying  their  pur- 
port before  I  received  them  from  her  hand.  As  the  evening  pro- 
gressed the  indications  pointed  more  and  more  strongly  to  defeat,  and 
by  eleven  o'clock  I  realized  that,  while  the  returns  from  the  country 
might  change  the  result,  the  success  of  my  opponent  was  more  than 
probable.  Confidence  resolved  itself  into  doubt,  and  doubt,  in  turn, 
gave  place  to  resignation.  While  the  compassionless  current  sped 
hither  and  thither,  carrying  its  message  of  gladness  to  foe 
and  its  message  of  sadness  to  friend,  there  vanished  from 
my  mind  the  vision  of  a  President  in  the  White  House, 
perplexed  by  the  cares  of  state,  and,  in  the  contemplation 
of  the  picture  of  a  citizen  by  his  fireside,  free  from  official  responsi- 
bility, I  fell  asleep. 

Later  reports  justified,  in  a  measure,  the  expectation  that  the  news 
from  the  country  would  be  more  favorable,  but  the  changes  were  not 
sufficient  to  affect  the  result.  During  Wednesday  and  Thursday  I 
was  in  communication  with  Chairman  Jones,  ready  to  concede  Mr. 
McKinley's  election  as  soon  as  the  National  Committee  received 
definite  returns  from  the  doubtful  States.  Thursday  evening  a  tele- 
gram came  from  Chairman  Jones  announcing  that  sufficient  was 
known  to  make  my  defeat  certain,  and  I  at  once  sent  the  following 

telegram  to  Mr.  McKinley: 

Lincoln.   Neb.,   November  5. 

Hon.  Wm.  McKinley,  Canton,  Ohio:  Senator  Jones  has  just  informed  me 
that  the  returns  indicate  your  election,  and  I  hasten  to  extend  my  congratula- 
tions. We  have  submitted  the  issue  to  the  American  people  and  their  will  is 
law.  W.  J.  Bryan. 

605 


606 


THE  ELECTION  RETURNS. 


STATES. 


Alabama 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Delaware 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho  

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts . . . 

Michigan  ... 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada  

New  Hampshire. 

New  Jersey 

New  York 

North  Carolina  . . 
North  Dakota  . . . 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania  ... 
Rhode  Island  . . . 
South  Carolina . . 
South  Dakota  . . . 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Vermont 

Virginia 

Washington 

West  Virginia  . . . 

Wisconsin 

Wyoming 


POPULAE  AND  ELECTOBAL  VOTE  OF  1892. 


CLBTBIiAND, 
DEM. 


_       ,         Elec- 
Popular.    toral 


138.138 

87,834 

118,174 


82,395 

18,581 

30.143 

129.386 


426,281 
262,740 
196,367 


175,461 

87.922 

48.024 

113.866 

176.858 

202.296 

100,919 

40,288 

268.188 

17,681 

24,943 

714 

42,081 

171.066 

654.908 

133,098 


404,115 
14,245 

462,264 

24,336 

54,698 

9,081 

136,477 

239,148 
16.326 

163,977 
29,844 
84,467 

177,456 


11 

8 
8 


6 

3 

4 

13 


24 
15 


13 

8 


9 
17 


10 

36 

11 

1 

1 


12 
15 

"h 

12 


BABBISON, 
BKP. 


_    ,    Elec- 
Popular.  toral, 


9,197 
46,974 
118.027 
38.620 
77,032 
18,072 

*  48',365 

8,799 

399.288 

255,616 

219,795 

167,237 

135,441 

13,331 

62,878 

92,736 

202,916 

222,708 

122,823 

1.396 

226.918 

18.861 

87.218 

2.811 

45,658 

156,101 

609.469 

100,665 

17,619 

406,187 

35,002 

516.011 

26,975 

13.384 

34.888 

99.973 

77,476 

37.992 

113.266 

36,457 

80,293 

170,698 

8,464 


Totals 5.664.685  277  6,172,333  145  1,040,600  22  270,314  ....  27,665 


13 


16 
9 
9 


1 
22 

3 
32 

4 


WEAVEE, 
PEO. 


Popular.  toral 


85,181 
11,831 
26,311 
53,584 
809 
564 

4,843 
42,937 
10.620 
22.207 
22,208 
20,596 
162,846 
23,500 
13.332 

2,045 
796 

3,348 
19,792 
29,279 
10.102 
41,102 

7,334 
83,134 

7.264 
293 
969 
16,430 
44,732 
17,667 
14,852 
26,875 

8,714 
228 

2,410 
26.644 
23.622 
99.638 
43 
12,275 
19.105 

4,166 

9.862 

7.722 


10 


BID  WELL, 
PEO. 


_   ,   Elec- 
Popolar.  toral 


239 

130 

8.096 

1.687 

4.026 

13 

670 

988 

286 

26,870 

13.060 

6.402 

4.538 

6.442 


3.062 

5,877 

7.539 

20,669 

14.182 

995 

4,318 

519 

4,902 

89 

1,297 

8,133 

38,193 

2,630 

897 

26,012 

2.281 

26.123 

1,654 


4,856 
2,165 
1,424 
2,798 
2,653 
2.145 
13,232 
530 


8CAT- 
TEBIMO 


The  candidates  for  Vice-President  and  their  electoral  votes  were:  Adlai  E.  Stevenson 
Democratic,  277;  Whltelaw  Reid,  Republican,  145;  James  G.  Field,  People's  22;  James  B, 
Cranflll,  Prohibition,  0. 

Simon  Wing,  Socialist  candidate  for  President,  and  C.  H.  Matchett,  for  Vice-President, 
received  17,656  votes  in  New  Yorlc,  649  in  Massachusetts,  1,337  in  New  Jersey,  898  in 
Pennsylvania,  336  in  Maine,  329  in  Connecticut,  and  27  in  Maryland. 

*  Cast  for  White  Republican  electors,  known  as  the  Lillie  White  ticket. 


608  THE  ELECTION  RETURNS. 

Mr.  McKinley  immediately  wired: 

Canton,  Ohio,  November  6. 

Hon.  W.  J.  Bryan,  Lincoln,  Neb.:  I  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your 
courteous  message  of  congratulations  with  thanks,  and  beg  you  will  receive 
my  best  wishes  for  your  health  and  happiness. 

William  McKinley. 

This  exchange  of  messages  was  much  commented  upon  at  the 
time,  though  why  it  should  be  considered  extraordinary  I  do  not 
know.  We  were  not  fighting  each  other,  but  stood  as  the  representa- 
tives of  different  political  ideas,  between  which  the  people  were  to 
choose.  Our  contest  aroused  no  personal  feeling  upon  the  part  of 
either,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  }iad  I  been  elected  he  would  as 
promptly  have  sent  his  congratulations.  A  courteous  observance  of  the 
proprieties  of  such  an  occasion  tends  to  eliminate  the  individual  and 
enables  opponents  to  contend  sharply  over  the  matters  of  principle, 
without  disturbance  of  social  relations,  I  look  back  with  much  sat- 
isfaction to  the  fact  that  the  four  political  contests  through  which  I 
have  passed,  two  successfully  and  two  unsuccessfully,  have  been  free 
from  personalities. 

It  may  be  interesting  to  the  reader  to  compare  the  election  returns 
of  1896  with  those  of  1892.  On  another  page  will  be  found  a  map 
showing  in  colors  the  political  complexion  of  the  States  in  1892,  and 
opposite  to  the  map  a  table  giving  both  the  popular  and  electoral 
vote  of  the  States;  also  a  map  and  table  giving  the  same  information 
in  regard  to  1896. 

The  combined  Democratic  and  Populist  vote  in  1S92  was  6,595,- 
285;  my  vote  in  1896  was  6,511,073,  showing  that,  leaving  out  of  cal- 
culation the  natural  increase  of  the  vote,  my  vote  only  fell  84,212 
short  of  the  vote  of  the  two  parties  combined. 

In  the  following  States,  Alabama,  Arkansas,  Colorado,  Florida, 
Georgia,  Idaho,  Kansas,  Louisiana,  Mississippi,  Missouri,  Montana, 
Nebraska,  Nevada,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  South  Dakota, 
Tennessee,  Texas,  Virginia,  Washington,  Wyoming,  which  gave  me 
their  electoral  vote,  my  popular  vote  was  2,427,172,  being  829,712 
more  than  the  vote  cast  for  Mr.  Cleveland  in  1892,  in  the  States  named, 
and  59,647  more  than  were  cast  that  year  for  both  Mr.  Cleveland  and 
Mr.  Weaver. 

In  the  following  States  carried  by  Mr.  McKinley,  including  the 
States  which  divided  their  electoral  vote,  California,  Connecticut,  Del- 
aware, Illinois,  Indiana,  Iowa,  Kentucky,  Maine,  Maryland,  Massa- 
chusetts, Michigan,  Minnesota,  New  Hampshire,  New  Jersey,  New 


THE  ELECTION  RETURNS.  609 

York,  North  Dakota,  Ohio,  Oregon,  Pennsylvania,  Rhode  Island, 
Vermont,  West  Virginia,  Wisconsin,  my  popular  vote  was  4,019,294, 
being  56,069  in  excess  of  the  vote  cast  for  Mr.  Cleveland  in  1892,  and 
only  214,474  behind  the  combined  vote  of  Mr.  Cleveland  and  Mr. 
Weaver. 

Only  in  the  following  States  did  my  vote  fall  below  Mr.  Cleveland's: 
Connecticut,  Delaware,  Maine,  Maryland,  Massachusetts,  New  Hamp- 
shire, New  Jersey,  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Rhode  Island,  Vermont, 
Wisconsin,  Alabama,  Georgia,  Louisiana  and  Virginia. 

Of  the  popular  vote  Mr.  McKinley  had  a  plurality  of  596,749, 
which  is  less  than  the  plurality  given  by  the  three  States,  Pennsylvania, 
New  York,  and  Massachusetts.  A  change  of  962  votes  from  Mr. 
McKinley's  column  to  mine  in  California  would  have  given  me  the 
entire  electoral  vote  of  that  State;  in  Oregon  a  change  of  1,069  votes 
would  have  given  me  the  electoral  vote  of  that  State;  in  Kentucky  a 
change  of  142  votes  would  have  given  me  the  entire  electoral  vote  of 
that  State;  in  Indiana  a  change  of  9,002  votes  would  have  given  me 
the  electoral  vote  of  that  State; in  North  Dakota  a  change  of  2,826  votes 
would  have  given  me  the  electoral  vote  of  that  State ;  in  West  Virginia 
a  change  of  5,445  votes  would  have  given  me  the  electoral  vote  of  that 
State.  Thus,  a  total  change  of  19,446  votes,  distributed  as  suggested 
above  in  the  States  named,  would  have  given  me  48  more  electoral 
votes,  or  a  total  of  224,  a  majority  of  i.  In  those  States  above  men- 
tioned the  total  vote  of  1892  was  1,449,622;  in  1896  the  total  vote  was 
1,728,216,  an  increase  of  278,594,  or  nearly  16  1-8  per  cent.,  while  the 
total  increase  in  the  nation  was  1,865,198,  or  nearly  13  2-5  per  cent. 

This  calculation  is  made  to  show  how  narrow  was  the  defeat  of 
bimetallism  and  what  is  possible  for  the  future.  The  six  States  above 
mentioned  were  all  considered  doubtful,  and  in  those  States  my  vote 
exceeded  by  72,193  the  total  vote  cast  for  Mr.  Cleveland  and  Mr. 
Weaver  in  1892. 


610 


THE  ELECTION  RETURNS. 


POPULAR  AND  ELECTORAL  VOTE  OF  1896 


STATES. 


Alabama 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Delaware 

Florida , 

Georgia , 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky , 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts  . . . 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi , 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska , 

Nevada  

New  Hampshire. 

New  Jersey , 

New  York , 

North  Carolina. . , 

North  Dakota 

Ohio , 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode  Island 

South  Carolina. . 
South  Dakota. . 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 

Vermont 

Virginia r . . 

Washington 

West  Virginia. .. 

Wisconsin 

Wyoming 


McKlNLET, 
BEP. 


Popular.    £^ 


54,737 

37,512 
146.688 

26,271 
110,285 

16,804 

11,288 

60,091 
6,324 
607,130 
323,754 
289,293 
159,345 
218,171 

22,037 

80,465 
136,959 
278,976 
293,582 
193,501 
5,130 
804,940 

10,494 

103,064 

1,938 

57,444 
221,367 
819.838 
155,222 

26,335 
525,991 

48,779 
728,300 

36,437 
9,281 

41,042 
148,773 
167,520 

13,491 

51,127 
135,368 

39,153 
105,368 
268,135 

10,072 


Totals 7,107,822  271  6.51 1,073  176  133,800 


Beyan, 
deh.,  peo.,  h.s. 


Popular.  ^ 


131,226 

110,103 

144,766 

161,063 

56.740 

13,424 

32,736 

94.232 

23,192 

465.613 

305,753 

223,741 

172,854 

217.890 

77,175 

34,688 

104,735 

105.711 

236,714 

139,626 

63.880 

363,667 

42,537 

115,999 

8,377 

21.650 

133,675 

551,396 

174,488 

20,686 

477,497 

46,662 

433,228 

14.459 

58,798 

41,225 

168,176 

370,434 

64,607 

10,637 

154,709 

51.646 

94,480 

165,523 

10,655 


11 


Palheb, 

NAT.  DEM. 


Popular.  ^ 


6,462 


2,006 


4,234 

877 

1,778 

2,708 


6,390 
2,145 
4,516 
1,200 
5,019 
1,834 
1,879 
2,507 
11,749 
6,879 
3,230 
1,071 
2,355 


2.886 


3.520 

6,373 

18,950 


1,857 

977 

11,000 

1,166 

828 


1,951 

5,046 

21 

1,331 

2,129 

1,668 

675 

4,584 


Levkbinq, 

PEG. 


8CAT- 
TEBINQ. 


Popular.  ^^ 


2,147 

889 

2,673 

1,717 

1,808 

355 

654 

5.543 

197 

9,796 

3,056 

3.192 

1,611 

4,781 


1,570 
5,918 
2,998 
5.025 
4,365 

486 
2,196 

186 
1,243 


779 

5,614 

16,052 

675 

358 

5.068 

919 

19,274 

1,160 


683 
3,098 
1.786 


733 

2.360 

968 

1,216 

7.609 

136 


130.683 


In  calculating  the  above  table  the  Bryan-Sewall  and  Bryan-Watson  tickets  have 
been  combined.  The  total  number  of  votes  received  by  the  Bryan  and  Watson  ticlcet  was 
222,207.  Of  this  number  Alabama  gave  24.089:  California,  21,623;  Colorado,  2,389;  Florida, 
2,053;  Illinois.  1,090;  Kansas,  46,194;  Maine,  2.487;  Massachusetts,  15,181;  Mississippi,  7,517; 
Nevada,  575;  New  Hampshire,  379;  Ohio,  2,615;  Pennsylvania,  11,174;  Tennessee,  4,525; 
Texas.  79,572;  Vermont,  458:  Wyoming,  286.  Fusion  electors  were  agreed  upon  by  the 
Democratic,  People's,  and  Silver  parties  in  the  following  States:  Arkansas,  California. 
Colorado,  Connecticut,  Idaho,  Illinois,  Iowa,  Kansas,  Kentucky,  Louisiana,  Michigan, 
Minnesota,  Missouri,  Montana,  Nebraska,  New  Jersey,  North  Carolina,  North  Dakota, 
Ohio.  Oregon,  Pennsylvania.  South  Dakota,  Utah,  Washington,  West  Virginia,  Wisconsin, 
and  Wyoming. 


CHAPTER   LI. 


REMINISCENCES. 

THE  reminiscences  of  the  campaign  of  1896  form  such  a  de- 
lightful chapter  in  memory's  book  that  I  am  constrained  to 
paraphrase  a  familiar  line  and  say  that  it  is  better  to  have 
run  and  lost  than  never  to  have  run  at  all. 

I  shall  always  carry  with  me  grateful,  as  well  as  pleasant,  recollec- 
tions of  the  newspapermen  with  whom  I  was  thrown.  After  my  nomi- 
nation the  first  premonitory  symptom  of  greatness  about  to  be  thrust 
upon  me  was  noted  at  the  Clifton  House  shortly  after  my  convention 
speech.  Immediately  after  my  return  from  the  hall,  a  representative 
of  a  local  paper  asked  me  if  I  would  have  any  objection  to  his  sitting 
in  my  room.  I  replied,  "No,"  and  then  innocently  inquired  why  he 
wanted  to  sit  there.  He  informed  me  that  his  paper  had  sent  him 
over  to  report  anything  of  interest.  In  a  few  minutes  another  repre- 
sentative of  the  press  dropped  in  upon  the  same  mission,  and  then 
another  until  my  room  was  full.  I  found  that  they  were  prepared  to 
minutely  report  circumstances  which  to  me  seemed  trivial.  The  angle 
of  inclination  was  noted  as  I  lay  upon  the  bed.  I  wa3  given  credit 
for  using  a  paper  to  protect  the  bedclothes  from  my  feet;  the  rabbit's 
foot  given  me  as  I  left  the  convention  hall  was  reproduced  in  the 
papers;  the  bulletins  announced  that  Mrs.  Bryan  preserved  her  com- 
posure during  the  nominating  scene,  and  when  I  remarked  that  I  was 
glad  she  had  done  so,  the  world  was  at  once  permitted  to  share  my 
joy.  When,  on  Saturday  night,  we  tried  to  steal  away  and  have  a 
Sunday's  rest  without  our  whereabouts  being  known,  I  found  that  five 
carriages  followed  ours,  and  the  omnipresent  news-gatherers  inter- 
viewed us  as  we  alighted.  But  they  were  a  gentlemanly  and  genial 
crowd,  and  I  soon  learned  to  save  myself  much  trouble  by  telling  them 
the  exact  moment  of  rising  and  retiring,  and  in  reporting  in  advance 
the  things  to  be  done  and,  in  review,  the  things  which  had  been  done. 

When  we  left  Chicago  on  our  homeward  trip  we  found  the  car 
filled  with  regular  and  special  correspondents,  who  seemed  destined 
for  exactly  the  same  towns  for  which  we  were  bound,  and  thereafter 
their  railroad  tickets  were  the  same  as  ours. 

Mr.  Robert  F.  Rose,  of  Chicago,  chief  of  the  Associated  Press 

612 


REMINISCENCES.  613 

detail,  and  Mr.  Richard  V.  Oulahan,  of  Washington,  who  acted  in  the 
same  capacity  for  the  United  Associated  Presses,  were  with  me  almost 
without  interruption  from  the  day  of  nomination  up  to  November  5, 
and  I  feel  greatly  indebted  to  the  two  press  associations  for  appoint- 
ing such  excellent  fellows  to  accompany  me.  Besides  Mr.  Rose,  for 
the  Associated  Press,  I  was  accompanied  to  Lincoln  by  Mr.  William 
E.  Glenn,  of  the  same  association,  and  from  Lincoln  to  New  York 
by  Mr.  J.  W.  Outright,  who,  after  severing  his  connection  with  the 
Associated  Press  immediately  after  the  Notification  meeting,  acted, 
for  a  time,  as  my  private  secretary.  Among  others  from  the  Asso- 
ciated Press  who  assisted  Mr.  Rose  were  Mr.  James  D.  Gibson,  of 
Chicago;  Mr.  Thomas  J.  Dawson,  of  Washington,  D.  C.;  Mr.  Albert 
E.  Hunt,  of  Philadelphia;  Mr.  S.  D.  Pine,  Mr.  F.  E.  Nevins  and  Miss 
N.  E.  Emerson,  of  St.  Louis;  Charles  Roehrig  and  Murray  J.  Brady, 
of  Chicago.  Mr.  Oulahan  was  assisted  from  time  to  time  by  Messrs. 
William  Gibson,  of  New  York,  who  went  with  us  on  the  first  trip 
from  Chicago  to  Lincoln,  Mr.  Hayes,  of  Washington,  Mr.  James 
Abbott,  of  Chicago,  and  Mr.  C.  F.  H.  Pagan,  of  New  York.  All  of 
these  assistants  were  both  agreeable  and  efficient,  and  I  may  add 
here  that  the  reports  given  by  both  the  associations  were  fair  and 
impartial  and  quite  complete  when  one  remembers  the  large  tax 
made  upon  telegraphic  facilities  by  numerous  meetings. 

Among  the  special  correspondents,  the  most  constant  in  attend- 
ance upon  our  travels  was  Mr.  Charles  M.  Pepper,  of  Chicago,  repre- 
senting the  New  York  Herald,  and  who  proved  that  an  unfriendly 
critic  could  still  be  a  very  friendly  man.  The  results  of  the  election 
returns  showed  him  to  be  the  best  calculator  in  our  party.  Mr.  A. 
Maurice  Low,  of  Boston,  representing  the  Globe,  of  that  city,  ranks 
next  to  Mr.  Pepper  in  distance  traveled,  and  in  congeniality  was  sec- 
ond to  none.  Both  Mr.  Low  and  Mr.  Pepper  have  earned  enviable 
reputations  as  special  writers.  Mr.  Herbert  J.  Browne,  of  the  New 
York  Journal,  came  next  in  the  length  of  service.  He  was  one  of  the 
best  writers  with  our  party.  Julian  Hawthorne,  Esq.,  of  the  New 
York  Journal,  and  James  Creelman,  Esq.,  then  of  the  New  York 
World,  but  now  of  the  New  York  Journal,  were  with  us  about  the 
same  length  of  time.  Their  reports  for  their  respective  papers  were 
marked  features  of  the  campaign.  We  are  especially  indebted  to  Mr. 
Hawthorne  for  his  description  of  the  trip  to  the  Notification  meeting 
and  to  Mr.  Creelman  for  his  report  of  the  closing  days  of  the  campaign. 
Alfred  Henry  Lewis,  Esq.,  also  of  the  New  York  Journal,  one  of  the 


614  REMINISCENCES. 

most  original  and  picturesque  of  American  writers,  was  with  us  dur- 
ing our  southern  trip,  while  Mr.  Rudolph  Block,  and  Mrs.  Winfred 
Black,  also  of  the  New  York  Journal,  were  with  us  long  enough  to 
make  their  departure  regretted.  Mr.  Albert  J.  Stofer,  of  the  Scripts- 
Rae  League,  is  recalled  as  a  representative  who  wrote  well  and  sang 
as  well  as  he  wrote.  My  fondness  for  the  watermelon  was  enhanced, 
if  possible,  by  his  rendition  of  "Dat  Water  Million  Hangin'  on  De 
Vine."  Mr.  M.  DeLipman,  of  the  New  York  Journal,  was  the  most 
noted  artist  who  traveled  with  our  party.  Among  those  who  were 
with  us  for  a  short  time  were  Mr.  Isaac  Jennings  Bryan,  of  the  Chi- 
cago Tribune,  Dr.  William  Shaw  Bowen,  of  the  New  York  World, 
Mr.  M.  J.  Hutchens,  of  the  New  York  World,  William  E.  Lewis, 
of  the  New  York  Journal,  Mr.  Gibson,  of  the  Philadelphia  Herald, 
Mr.  Chamberlain,  of  the  New  York  Sun,  Mr.  Percy  Walton,  of  the 
Evening  Sun  (N.  Y.),  Mr.  Lloyd,  of  the  New  York  Sun,  Mr.  James 
Faulkner,  of  the  Cincinnati  Enquirer,  Mr.  Tabor,  of  the  Buffalo 
Times,  Mr.  Melbourne  McDowell  and  Mr.  Carl  Smith,  of  the  Chicago 
Record,  Mr.  Adams,  of  the  Boston  Herald,  Mr.  West,  of  the  Wash- 
ington Post,  and  Mr.  Lowrie,  of  the  Chicago  Times-Herald.  Mr. 
Irwin  Thomas,  of  the  New  York  Journal,  who  was  with  us  from  the 
date  of  the  Notification  meeting  until  we  arrived  in  St.  Louis  on  the 
third  trip,  was  an  easy  first  among  the  orators  of  the  press,  his  reputa- 
tion being  firmly  established  in  one  speech  at  Erie,  Pa. 

I  desire  to  record,  not  because  it  is  strange,  but  because  it  deserves 
to  be  recorded,  that  while  I  talked  freely  with  the  members  of  our 
party,  none  of  them  violated  my  confidence,  nor  did  any,  so  far  as  I 
recollect,  make  a  serious  error  in  quoting  me.  They  were  an  honor- 
able body  of  men  and  a  credit  to  the  high  profession  to  which  they 
belonged. 

I  cannot  speak  from  my  own  observation  of  the  National  Silver 
party  and  People's  party  conventions,  but  some  of  the  scenes  enacted 
in  the  Democratic  convention  are  indelibly  written  upon  my  memory. 
There  were  more  interesting  incidents,  I  think,  connected  with  this 
convention  than  with  any  recently  held  in  the  United  States.  The 
contest  over  the  temporary  chairmanship,  the  contest  over  credentials, 
the  contest  over  the  platform,  and  finally  the  contest  over  the  nomina- 
tions, were  all  exciting  and  contained  enough  of  uncertainty  to  make 
every  session  an  interesting  one.  As  for  my  own  part,  circumstances 
were  more  favorable  than  I  could  have  planned.     I  was  first  sug- 


REMINISCENCES.  615 

gested  for  the  temporary  chairmanship,  but  my  name  was  ruled  out 
when  the  National  Committee  recognized  the  gold  delegates  from  our 
State,  and  permitted  them  to  participate  in  the  temporary  organization. 
My  name  was  again  discussed  in  connection  with  the  permanent  chair- 
manship, but  there  being  then  some  talk  at  that  time  of  my  possible 
nomination,  ,some  friends  thought  it  might  embarrass  my  candidacy 
and  some  opponents  thought  it  might  give  me  an  advantage  over 
other  candidates,  and  so  this  honor  passed  me  by.  It  was  fortunate 
for  me  that  I  lost  both  these  opportunities  to  address  the  convention. 

Being  in  attendance  upon  the  resolutions  committee,  I  could  not 
respond  when  speeches  were  called  for  during  the  temporary  organ- 
ization. Not  being  upon  the  sub-committee  which  drafted  the  plat- 
form, I  was  not  expected  to  take  part  in  the  platform  debate.  I  have 
already  spoken  of  the  unexpected  invitation  extended  by  Senator 
Jones.  An  opportunity  to  close  such  a  debate  had  never  come  to  me 
before,  and  I  doubt  if  as  good  an  opportunity  had  ever  come  to  any 
other  person  during  this  generation.  A  large  majority  of  the  delegates 
were  earnest  advocates  of  free  coinage  at  i6  to  i,  the  speeches  of  Sen- 
ators Hill  and  Vilas  and  ex-Governor  Russell  had  aroused  much  feel- 
ing, and  our  people  were  prepared  to  vigorously  support  an  exponent 
of  bimetallism. 

I  never  addressed  an  audience  which  seemed  to  act  in  such  perfect 
harmony;  it  reminded  one  of  an  immense  chorus  trained  to  sing  in 
concert.  The  applause  broke  out  simultaneously  in  all  parts  of  the 
hall,  and  ended  as  simultaneously  when  the  next  sentence  began.  The 
intense  interest  depicted  upon  the  faces  before  me  presented  a  picture 
never  to  be  forgotten. 

I  was  not  permitted  to  see  the  rival  demonstrations  which  took 
place  during  the  nominating  speeches  and  balloting,  but  they  surpassed 
in  excitement  anything  before  witnessed  by  those  in  attendance. 

During  the  progress  of  the  campaign,  I  was  constantly  gratified 
to  note  the  splendid  work  done  by  the  Populists  and  Silver  Republi- 
cans. I  speak  of  this  especially,  because  it  requires  much  more  of  moral 
courage  to  leave  one's  party  to  support  a  candidate  connected  with  a 
different  party,  than  it  does  to  support  a  candidate  bearing  the  same 
party  name.  Such  men  as  Senators  Teller,  Dubois,  Pettigrew,  Cannon 
and  Mantle,  and  ex-Congressman  Towne,  Hartman,  Shafroth,  Wilson 
— I  merely  mention  the  leaders,  their  followers  were  legion — were  as 
active  during  the  campaign  as  any  of  our  Democrats.  Among  the 
Populists,  in  addition  to  members  of  the  various  committees.  Senators 

85 


616  REMINISCENCES. 

Allen,  Butler,  Kyle  and  Peffer,  and  Governor  Holcomb,  ex-Congress- 
man Simpson,  now  Congressman-elect,  Messrs.  Donnelly,  Taubeneck, 
Sovereign,  Debs,  Waite  and  Coxey,  and  in  fact  nearly  all  the  other 
Populists  of  prominence  were  vigorously  at  work  during  the  campaign. 

Among  the  Democrats  I  have  felt  that  special  mention  should  be 
made  of  the  eastern  brethren  who,  during  the  battle,  stood  in  the  most 
dangerous  places,  and  since  the  election  have  had  less  of  local  victory 
to  console  them.  Our  political  history  does  not  record  the  names  of 
more  valiant  fighters  than  the  men  who,  like  Mr.  Sewall,  ex-Congress- 
man Williams,  and  Editor  Troop,  of  New  England;  Senator  Murphy, 
Chairman  Danforth,  Committeeman  Campbell  and  Editor  Mack,  of 
New  York;  Committeeman  Kerr  and  Chairman  Garman,  of  Pennsyl- 
vania; Johnson  Cornish,  of  New  Jersey;  Chairman  Kenney,  of  Dela- 
ware; and  Senator  Gorman,  of  Maryland,  and  those  associates  of  these 
three  leaders,  reorganized  the  Democratic  party  and,  in  spite  of  Re- 
publicans and  bolters,  organized  a  political  body  which  grew  in  num- 
bers and  enthusiasm  as  the  campaign  progressed.  The  vote  cast  for 
silver  in  the  States  between  the  Alleghanies  and  the  Missouri — the 
States  which  witnessed  the  fiercest  contest — shows  of  prodigious 
work  done  by  the  leaders,  new  and  old.  This  campaign  demon- 
strated the  ease  with  which  leaders  can  be  developed.  The  Demo- 
cratic army  lost  many  of  its  commanders  of  high  rank,  and  yet  a 
single  campaign  raised  up  such  efficient  officers  that  in  most  of  the 
States  the  party  polled  a  larger  vote  than  ever  before.  Moral:  It 
is  easier  for  an  army  to  select  generals  than  for  generals  to  raise  an 
army.  This  campaign  excited  more  interest  among  the  women  than 
campaigns  usually  do.  This  interest  was  not  confined  to  the  States 
where  the  right  of  suffrage  has  been  extended  to  women,  but  was  as 
noticeable  in  those  States  where  the  subject  has  not  been  agitated. 

Unless  I  am  mistaken,  the  deep  awakening  among  the  people 
during  the  campaign  just  closed  will  result  in  a  more  careful  study 
of  political  questions  by  both  men  and  women,  and  in  a  more  rigid 
scrutiny  of  tfie  conduct  of  public  officials  by  those  whom  they  serve. 
No  matter  what  may  be  the  ultimate  outcome  of  the  struggle  over  the 
financial  question,  better  government  will  result  from  the  political 
interest  which  has  been  aroused. 

It  may  be  said  of  the  colored  soldiers  who  fought  with  us,  that 
they  not  only  fought  nobly,  but  that  they  were  more  numerous  than 
in  any  previous  contest.  It  may  also  be  remarked  that  the  colored 
men  who  left  the  Republican  party  in  1896,  did  so  because  of  an  in- 


REMINISCENCES.  617 

tclligent  understanding  of  the  money  question.  Conviction  had  fol- 
lowed investigation,  and  political  independence  followed  conviction. 
During  the  campaign  I  ran  across  various  evidences  of  coercion, 
direct  and  indirect.  One  of  the  most  common  means  of  influencing 
voters  was  the  advertising  of  orders  placed  with  maufacturers,  condi- 
tioned upon  Republican  success  at  the  polls.  The  following  is  an 
illustration.  Tuesday  morning,  November  3d,  there  appeared  at  the 
head  of  the  last  column  of  the  first  page  of  the  Morning  News,  of 
Wilmington,  Del.: 

The  Harlan  and  Hollingsworth  Company,  of  this  city,  have  received  a 
contract  for  a  boat  costing  $300,000.  One  clause  in  the  contract  provides  that 
in  the  event  of  Bryan's  election  the  contract  shall  be  canceled.  If  the  boat 
is  built  here  $160,000  of  its  cost  would  be  paid  to  Wilmington  workmen  for 
wages.  The  corporation  wanting  the  boat  feel  that  it  would  not  be  justified 
in  having  it  constructed  if  Bryan  should  become  President. 

On  another  page  of  the  paper  was  the  following  editorial,  calling 
attention  to  the  news  item: 

Contingent  Orders. 
It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  contract  made  by  the  Harlan  and  Hollings- 
v.'orth  Company  for  the  building  of  a  vessel,  work  upon  which  would  mean 
the  payment  of  wages  amounting  to  about  $160,000  to  Wilmington  mechanics 
and  laborers,  should  have  a  contingent  provision.  The  contingency  is  that 
if  Bryan  should  unfortunately  be  elected,  the  contract  is  to  be  canceled. 
Contracts  of  that  character  are  not  new,  and  several  of  them  have  been  made 
within  the  last  four  or  five  weeks. 

I  may  mention  a  still  more  forcible  means  adopted  by  many  em- 
ployers. The  workingmen  were  paid  off  Saturday  night  before  elec- 
tion and  notified  that  they  might  expect  work  Wednesday  morning 
in  case  of  Mr.  McKinley's  election,  but  that  they  need  not  return 
if  I  was  elected.  Wliether  the  employers  themselves  were  actually 
afraid  or  whether  they  merely  intended  to  frighten  their  employers, 
the  plan  worked  admirably  and  exerted  a  most  potent  influence  on 
flection  day.  The  coercion  practiced  by  the  large  financiers  upon 
the  small  ones,  and  by  the  small  ones  upon  borrowers,  was  far 
reaching-  in  its  extent.  November  6  the  St.  James  Gazette,  of  Lon- 
don, England,  in  describing  the  American  campaign,  published  the 
following  letter,  signed  "Observer." 

Coercion  by  Money  Loaners. 

To  the  Editor:  Sir — Your  comments  upon  the  Presidential  election  are  cer- 
tainly timely.  The  success  of  Mr.  Bryan  on  this  occasion  against  such  an 
enormous  force  would  have  been  nothing  short  of  a  miracle.    The  true  inward- 


618  REMINISCENCES. 

ness  of  the  cause  of  his  defeat  is  the  use  of  money  to  turn  the  farmer  vote  in 
the  pivotal  Central  Western  States.  The  Eastern  insurance  companies,  who 
own  the  mortgages  on  the  farms  in  Iowa,  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  the  neighbor- 
ing States,  and  also  who  have  agents  in  every  hamlet  almost,  six  weeks  ago, 
fearing  things  were  running  in  favor  of  Bryan,  sent  to  these  agents  instructions 
to  see  personally  every  farmer  and  come  to  an  understanding  (written  even) 
that  if  McKinley  were  elected  they  would  grant  five  years'  extension  of  the 
loan  at  a  low  rate  of  interest.  The  temptation  to  the  tens  of  thousands  of 
farmers  was  naturally  too  great  for  them  to  resist.  It  was  a  certainty,  whereas 
relief  through  Bryan  was  comparatively  remote.  I  have  this  fact  from  a  rel- 
ative in  Iowa,  who  got  the  relief  himself. 

The  loss  of  interest  to  the  insurance  companies  will  be  great,  but  they  ex- 
pect to  sell  in  London  a  mass  of  depreciated  securities,  with  which  they  have 
been  loaded  up  for  years,  on  the  boom  which  they  now  are  looking  for,  and  in 
that  way  to  get  even.  They  propose,  that  as  London  has  benefited  by  the  way 
they  have  squared  the  farmer  vote,  London  shall  pay  for  it,  as  the  insurance 
agents  out  there  jocosely  remark. 

If  the  gold  standard  continues,  actual  and  painful  experience 
will,  in  my  judgment,  at  last  convince  the  people  that  a  government 
by  banks,  corporations  and  syndicates  cannot  guarantee  permanent 
and  general  prosperity.  The  time  will  come  when  the  convictions 
of  the  majority  will  be  so  deep  that  neither  creditor  nor  employer  can 
control  the  result  of  the  election. 

While  there  were  a  great  many  campaign  songs,  "Home,  Sweet 
Home"  seemed  to  be  the  most  popular.  This  was  rendered  on  many 
occasions,  and  often  very  beautifully. 

It  is  impossible  to  approximate  the  number  of  poems  written 
during  the  campaign,  many  of  them  of  real  merit.  I  recall  one,  of 
which  I  received  the  original  manuscript  at  Pittsburg.  It  was  writ- 
ten with  a  lead  pencil  upon  scraps  of  paper  and  the  author  was  a 
coal  miner.  It  contained  references  to  Biblical  history,  as  well  as 
classical  allusions,  and  wove  into  verse  the  phraseology  of  the  mine. 
I  remember  that  in  one  stanza  the  necessity  for  two  shafts  in  a  mine 
was  used  to  illustrate  the  advantages  of  two  kinds  of  metal  for  money. 

The  total  number  of  miles  traveled,  as  shown  by  the  schedules, 
was  about  18,000.  I  have  no  way  of  ascertaining  the  exact  number 
of  speeches  made,  but  an  estimate  of  600  is  not  far  from  correct.  It 
is  difficult  to  make  an  estimate  of  the  number  of  persons  addressed. 
Mr.  Rose,  of  the  Associated  Press,  thought  about  5,000,000  the  total 
number  in  attendance  at  my  meetings,  while  IMr.  Oulahan,  of  the 
United  Associated  Presses,  places  the  number  at  4,800,000.  This,  0/ 
course,  includes  men,  women  and  children. 


REMINISCENCES.  619 

After  leaving  home,  on  September  9th,  when  I  started  on  my 
long  trip,  up  to  November  3d,  I  spent  every  day,  excepting  Sunday, 
in  campaigning.  So  far  as  my  physical  comfort  was  concerned,  the 
greatest  anxiety  was  expressed  as  to  the  condition  of  my  throat.  I 
tried  a  cold  compress,  and  a  hot  compress,  and  a  cold  gargle  and  a 
hot  gargle,  and  cough  drops  and  cough  cures  and  cough  killers  in 
endless  variety  and  profusion,  and,  finally  abandoning  all  remedies, 
found  my  voice  in  better  condition  during  the  latter  days,  without 
treatment,  than  it  was  earlier  in  the  campaign. 

I  was  most  fatigued  while  in  Chicago.  In  fact,  when  on  Wednes- 
day evening,  October  28th,  I  returned  after  midnight  to  the  Auditori- 
um Annex,  where  we  stopped  during  that  visit  to  Chicago,  I  was  so 
nearly  exhausted  that  our  start  for  the  trip  through  the  northern  part 
of  the  State  the  next  morning  was  delayed  a  couple  of  hours. 

In  all  this  travel  there  was  but  little  delay  and  no  accident  of  any 
consequence  to  any  member  of  the  party. 

As  we  learn  by  experience,  my  experience  may  be  of  value  to 
those  who  may  hereafter  be  engaged  in  a  similar  campaign.  I  soon 
found  that  it  was  necessary  to  stand  upon  the  rear  platform  of  the 
last  car  in  order  to  avoid  danger  to  those  who  crowded  about  the 
train.  I  also  found  that  it  was  much  easier  to  speak  from  the 
platform  of  the  car  than  to  go  to  a  stand,  no  matter  how  close. 
Much  valuable  time  was  wasted  by  going  even  a  short  distance, 
because  in  passing  through  a  crowd  it  was  always  necessary  to  do 
more  or  less  of  handshaking,  and  this  occupied  time.  Moreover,  to 
push  one's  way  through  a  dense  crowd  is  more  fatiguing  than  talk- 
ing. Speaking  from  the  car  also  avoided  the  falling  of  platforms, 
a  form  of  danger  which,  all  through  the  campaign,  I  feared  more 
than  I  feared  breaking  down  from  overwork.  A  platform,  strong 
enough  ordinarily,  was  in  danger  of  being  overtaxed  when  the  crowd 
centered  at  one  place  in  an  endeavor  to  shake  hands  with  the  can- 
didate. 

The  ratio  of  16  to  i  was  scrupulously  adhered  to  during  the  cam- 
paign, and  illustrated  with  infinite  variety.  At  one  place  our  car- 
riage was  drawn  by  sixteen  white  horses  and  one  yellow  horse:  at 
any  number  of  places  we  were  greeted  by  sixteen  young  ladies 
dressed  in  white  and  one  dressed  in  yellow,  or  by  sixteen  young  men 
dressed  in  white  and  one  dressed  in  yellow.  But  the  ratio  was  most 
frequently  represented  in  flowers,  sixteen  white  chrysanthemums  and 
one  vellow  one  being  the  favorite  combination.     I  was  the  recipient 


620  REMINISCENCES. 

of  lucky  coins,  lucky  stones  and  pocket  pieces  and  badges  and  but- 
tons. During  the  campaign  I  received  gold  headed  canes,  plain 
canes,  leather  canes,  thorn  canes,  and  even  a  glass  cane.  Some  were 
votes  at  church  fairs,  of  a  variety  of  denominations,  some  were  taken 
from  famous  battle-fields,  and  one  was  made  from  the  house  in  which 
Patrick  Henry  made  his  first  speech,  I  received  a  silver  Waterbury 
vvatch,  presented  by  a  Connecticut  bimetallist  (he  thought  it  embar- 
rassing for  me  to  time  myself  with  a  gold  watch  while  making  a  silver 
speech),  two  rings,  one  with  a  sixteen  to  one  set  and  one  made  of  a 
coin  in  circulation  at  the  time  of  the  first  Christian  emperor.  I  re- 
ceived four  handsome  live  eagles,  two  from  Telluride,  Colo.,  and  two 
from  Burke,  Idaho,  and  one  stuffed  eagle  which  had  been  killed  in 
Nebraska.  One  of  the  prettiest  souvenirs  of  the  campaign  was  a 
watch  charm,  emblematic  of  bimetallism.  Beautiful  specimens  of 
wire  gold  and  wire  silver  are  enclosed  in  crystal,  showing  the  one 
color  on  the  one  side  and  the  other  on  the  reverse. 

It  is  impossible  to  chronicle  all  the  evidences  of  kindly  feeling 
given  during  the  campaign;  in  fact  the  good  will  manifested  and  the 
intense  feeling  shown  impressed  me  more  than  any  other  feature  of 
the  campaign.  When  the  result  was  announced  my  composure  was 
more  endangered  by  the  sorrow  exhibited  by  friends  than  it  was  dur- 
ing all  the  excitement  of  the  struggle.  Men  broke  down  and  cried 
as  they  expressed  their  regret,  and  there  rises  before  me  now  the  face 
of  a  laboring  man  of  Lincoln,  who,  after  he  dried  his  tears,  held  out 
his  hand  from  which  three  fingers  were  missing,  and  said:  "I  did 
not  shed  a  tear  when  those  were  taken  ofT."  People  have  often  light- 
ly said  that  they  would  die  for  a  cause,  but  it  may  be  asserted  in  all 
truthfulness  that  during  the  campaign  just  closed  there  were  'thou- 
sands of  bimetallists  who  would  have  given  their  lives,  had  their  lives 
been  demanded,  in  order  to  secure  success  to  the  principles  which 
they  advocated.     Surely  greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this. 


CHAPTER  LII. 


EXPLANATIONS. 

THIS  chapter  will  be  devoted  to  an  explanation  of  the  plan  fol- 
lowed in  the  preparation  of  this  volume.  The  platforms  of 
the  three  parties,  Democratic,  National  Silver  and  Populist, 
which  united  in  the  demand  for  free  and  unlimited  coinage  at  sixteen 
to  one,  and  in  my  nomination,  are  given  in  full.  In  reporting  the 
Democratic,  National  Silver  party  and  Populist  conventions,  I  have 
followed  the  order  in  which  the  nominations  were  made.  While  the 
National  Silver  party  and  Populist  party  conventions  assembled  on  the 
same  day,  the  former  finished  its  work  first.  The  national  platforms 
adopted  by  the  Republican  party  and  bolting  Democrats  are  given  in 
so  far  as  they  relate  to  the  money  question. 

The  letters  of  acceptance  of  Mr.  McKinley  and  Mr.  Hobart,  in  so 
far  as  they  discuss  the  money  plank,  are  given  in  order  that  the  reader 
may  understand  the  position  taken  upon  this  question  by  the  Re- 
publican party. 

The  notification  speech  delivered  by  Gov.  Stone,  and  the  letter 
of  notification  delivered  by  the  Democratic  committee,  the  letter  of 
notification  delivered  by  the  Populist  committee,  and  Mr.  Groot's 
verbal  presentation  of  the  Silver  party  nomination,  are  given,  together 
with  my  letters  accepting  the  Democratic  and  Populist  nomination, 
and  my  speech  accepting  the  Silver  party  nomination.  Following  this 
will  be  found  the  speech  delivered  by  Mr.  Sewall  at  the  notification 
meeting  and  his  letter  of  acceptance.  I  have  also  included  a  bio- 
graphical sketch  of  Mr.   Sewall. 

In  addition  to  these  documents,  I  have  given  the  speeches  of  the 
temporary  and  permanent  chairmen  of  the  three  friendly  conventions, 
together  with  the  nominating  speeches  presenting  the  names  of  the 
successful  candidates  at  the  three  conventions,  namely,  the  speeches 
of  Mr.  Lewis,  Mr.  Little  and  Mr.  Weaver,  presenting  my  name;  the 
speech  of  Mr.  Burk,  placing  Mr.  Sewall's  name  before  the  Demo- 
cratic convention  (no  speech  was  made  in  presenting  his  name  at  the 
Silver  convention),  and  the  speech  of  Mr.  Howard  in  the  Populist  con- 
vention, presenting  the  name  of  Mr.  Watson.     I  have  also  given 

621 


622  EXPLANA  TIONS. 

an  extract  from  the  speeches  deHvered  by  Mr.  Flower  and  Mr.  Caffery, 
as  temporary  and  permanent  chairmen  of  the  IndianapoUs  convention, 
together  with  the  messages  of  regret  of  Mr,  Cleveland  and  Mr.  Carlisle, 
read  at  the  Louisville  notification  meeting. 

Senator  Teller's  speech  in  the  Republican  convention  is  given,  and 
also  the  address  issued  by  the  silver  Republicans,  the  'first  just  after  the 
adjournment  of  the  Republican  convention,  and  the  second  after  the 
adjournment  of  the  Chicago  convention,  because  the  speech  and 
addresses  set  forth  the  reasons  given  by  the  silver  Republicans  for 
leaving  the  Republican  party.  Tlie  appeal  for  funds  issued  by  the 
Democratic  committee  is  reproduced,  as  it  shows  the  source  to  which 
the  committee  looked  for  financial  support,  and  the  address  issued  by 
the  Populist  committee  is  given  because  it  presents  the  arguments 
which  induced  the  Populists  to  join  the  Democrat^  in  the  selection  of 
electors.  All  of  these  documents  are,  in  a  certain  sense,  of  an  official 
nature. 

To  have  gone  beyond  these  would  have  compelled  me  to  make  se- 
lections between  the  speeches  of  individuals,  which  would  be  neither 
pleasant  to  myself  nor  kind  to  those  who  have  supported  the  cause  of 
bimetallism  with  equal  zeal  and  fidelity.  I  realize  that  I  have  not  been 
able  to  enter  into  detail  in  describing  the  journeys  made  during  the 
campaign,  the  space  at  my  disposal  making  anything  like  an  elaborate 
review  impossible.  In  selecting  speeches  for  reproduction,  I  have  tried 
to  present  as  much  variety  as  possible  in  the  treatment  of  the  various 
phases  of  the  money  question,  and  also  to  select  those  which  contained 
quotations  from  the  speeches  and  writings  of  others.  It  has  been 
necessary  to  cut  down  some  speeches  which  I  would  have  been  glad  to 
give  in  full,  and  many  speeches  have  been  omitted  altogether. 

In  the  matter  of  illustration,  so  far  as  the  pictures  of  public  men 
are  concerned,  I  have  followed  substantially  the  same  plan  as  in  the 
selection  of  printed  matter. 

No  words  are  necessary  to  justify  the  prominence  given  to  Mr. 
Bland,  Mr.  Weaver  and  Mr.  Teller,  to  whom  the  book  is  dedicated. 
Their  services  in  their  respective  parties  have  placed  them  in  a  position 
where  all  must  concede  the  propriety  of  the  partiality  which  I  have 
shown  them. 

The  pictures  of  Messrs.  McKinley  and  Hobart,  the  successful  can- 
didates in  the  first  battle,  have  been  given,  together  with  the  picture  of 
Mr.  Sewall,  the  Vice-Presidential  nominee  of  the  Democratic  and  silver 
parties.     I  had  intended  to  present  the  picture  of  Mr.  Watson,  the 


EXPLANA  TIONS.  623 

Populist  nominee  for  the  Vice-Presidency,  together  with  a  biographic- 
al sketch  and  some  extracts  from  his  campaign  utterances,  but  have 
refrained  from  doing  so  at  his  request.  I  may  add  here  that,  while  I 
did  not  fully  agree  with  him  as  to  the  methods  to  be  employed  during 
the  campaign,  I  never  questioned  his  good  faith  or  his  right  to  pursue 
such  a  course  as  he  thought  to  be  best  for  the  success  of  the  reforms  in 
which  he  was  interested. 

The  pictures  of  Senator  Jones,  Mr.  Lane  and  Senator  Butler,  chair- 
men of  the  national  committees  of  the  respective  parties,  deserve  a 
place  in  any  volume  which  attempts  to  describe  a  campaign  in  which 
these  gentlemen  took  so  conspicuous  and  hpnorable  a  part. 

The  temporary  and  permanent  chairmen  of  the  three  conventions 
controlled  by  the  silver  forces,  namely,  Senators  Daniel  and  White,  of 
the  Democratic  convention,  Messrs.  Newlands  and  St.  John,  of  the 
Silver  convention,  and  Senators  Butler  and  Allen,  of  the  Populist  con- 
vention, are  entitled  to  special  recognition.  In  the  National  Silver 
convention  Mr.  Towne  was  made  permanent  vice-chairman,  an  unusual 
compliment,  which,  together  with  his  distinguished  services  in  behalf 
of  bimetallism,  justifies  me,  I  think,  in  placing  his  picture  among  those 
of  the  presiding  officers  of  the  diree  conventions. 

The  reader  will  be  interested  in  preserving  the  pictures  of  the 
leading  candidates  for  the  Presidency  before  the  various  conventions, 
therefore  I  have  included  those  of  Messrs.  Blackburn,  Boies,  McLean, 
Matthews,  Pattison  and  Tillman,  candidates  before  the  Democratic 
convention.  The  high  official  position  held  by  Vice-President  Steven- 
son would  entitle  his  picture  to  a  place  in  this  volume,  without  refer- 
ence to  the  vote  which  he  received  in  the  National  Convention.  I  in- 
clude the  picture  of  Mr.  Norton,  my  only  rival  for  the  Populist  nomina- 
tion. (I  had  no  opposition  in  the  Silver  party  convention.)  To  these 
I  have  added  the  picture  of  one  who  was  not  a  candidate  for  the 
Presidency,  Governor  Altgeld,  whose  overshadowing  influence  in 
Illinois,  a  pivotal  and  pioneer  State,  justifies  me  in  making  an  excep- 
tion of  him.  In  the  absence  of  a  picture  of  Mr.  Watson,  I  have  taken 
the  liberty  of  inserting  a  picture  of  Hon.  Ignatius  Donnelly,  who  was 
not  only  one  of  the  prominent  friends  of  Mr.  Watson  in  the  St.  Louis 
convention,  but  is  one  of  the  most  distinguished  leaders  of  the  Populist 
party. 

Believing  that  the  work  would  be  incomplete  without  them,  I  have 
added  the  pictures  of  Mr.  W.  H.  Har\'ey,  whose  work  has  been  de- 
scribed in  another  chapter;  Mr.  Warner,  who  was  for  so  long  a  time  a 


624  EXPLANA  TIONS. 

central  spirit  in  the  American  Bimetallic  League;  Senators  Jones  and 
Stewart,  of  Nevada,  who  were  prominent  in  the  conference  of  Feb- 
ruary 22,  1895,  and  Mr.  Sibley,  who  was,  at  that  conference,  suggested 
for  the  Presidency.  My  respect  for  the  memory  of  my  legal  preceptor, 
Hon.  Lyman  Trumbull,  leads  me  to  include  his  picture  in  the  collec- 
tion. In  the  selection  of  other  illustrations  I  have  been  guided  largely 
by  the  opinion  of  my  publishers. 

While  this  brief  history  can  only  record  the  names  and  work  of 
those  who  occupied  positions  of  prominence  in  the  fight,  I  desire  to 
express  my  appreciation  of  the  zeal,  fidelity  and  labors  of  those 
nameless  heroes  who,  in  every  State,  county  and  precinct  bore  the  bur- 
den of  the  battle  and  on  all  occasions  did  their  part.  In  one  chapter 
will  be  found  the  names  of  the  members  of  the  three  national  commit- 
tees. To  these  might  have  been  added,  if  space  permitted,  the  names 
of  the  several  committees  of  the  States,  counties  and  precincts  of  the 
three  parties  which  joined  in  the  demand  for  financial  independence. 
Even  could  these  names  have  been  given  the  roll  would  have  included 
only  the  officers  who  directed  the  movements  of  the  army  which  num- 
bered 6,500,000 — nearly  one  million  more  than  ever,  until  this  year, 
gave  their  suffrages  to  a  Presidential  candidate.  A  thousand  volumes 
such  as  this  would  not  suffice  to  record  the  speeches  made,  the  sacri- 
fices endured  and  the  heroism  displayed  by  the  advocates  of  bimetal- 
lism; but  the  part  taken  by  each  individual  is  known  in  his  community, 
'and,  aside  from  the  approval  which  merit  always  wins,  the  actors  have 
the  satisfaction  of  knowing  that  each  has  contributed  as  much  of  bene- 
fit as  opportunity  permitted. 

I  am  proud  of  the  character  of  my  support.  Those  who  voted  for 
me  did  so  of  their  own  volition ;  neither  coercion  nor  purchase  secured 
their  suffrages;  their  confidence  and  good  will  rob  defeat  of  all  its 
pangs. 


CHAPTER    LIII. 


A 


THE    FUTURE. 

S  soon  as  the  result  of  the  election  was  definitely  known,  1 
issued  to  the  binietallists  of  the  United  States  an  address, 
which  will  be  found  below: 


Address  to  Bimetallists. 

To  the  Bimetallists  of  the  United  States:  Conscious  that  millions  of  loyal 
hearts  are  saddened  by  temporary  defeat,  I  beg  to  offer  a  word  of  hope  and 
encouragement.  No  cause  ever  had  supporters  more  brave,  earnest  and  de- 
voted than  those  who  have  espoused  the  cause  of  bimetallism.  They  have 
fought  from  conviction,  and  have  fought  with  all  the  zeal  which  conviction  in- 
spires. Events  will  prove  whether  they  are  right  or  wrong.  Having  done  their 
duty  as  they  saw  it,  they  have  nothing  to  regret.  The  Republican  candidate 
has  been  heralded  as  the  advance  agent  of  prosperity.  If  his  policies  bring  real 
prosperity  to  the  American  people,  those  who  opposed  him  will  share  in  that 
prosperity.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  his  policies  prove  an  injury  to  the  people 
generally,  those  of  his  supporters  who  do  not  belong  to  the  office  holding  class, 
or  to  the  privileged  classes,  will  suffer  in  common  with  those  who  opposed  him. 
The  friends  of  bimetallism  have  not  been  vanquished;  they  have  simply  been 
overcome.  They  believe  that  the  gold  standard  is  a  conspiracy  of  the  money- 
changers against  the  welfare  of  the  human  race,  and  they  will  continue  the  war- 
fare against  it. 

The  contest  has  been  waged  this  year  under  great  embarrassments  and 
against  great  odds.  Fo»-  the  first  time  during  this  generation  public  attention 
has  been  centered  upon  the  money  question  as  the  paramount  issue,  and  this 
has  been  done  in  spite  of  all  attempts  upon  the  part  of  our  opponerits  to  pre- 
vent it.  The  Republican  convention  held  out  the  delusive  hope  of  international 
bimetallism,  while  Republican  leaders  labored  secretly  for  gold  monometallism. 
Gold  standard  Democrats  have  publicly  advocated  the  election  of  the  Indianap- 
olis ticket,  while  they  labored  secretly  for  the  election  of  the  Republican  ticket. 
The  trusts  and  corporations  have  tried  to  excite  a  fear  of  lawlessness,  while 
they  themselves  have  been  defying  the  law;  and  American  financiers  have  boast- 
ed that  they  were  custodians  of  national  honor,  while  they  were  secretly 
bartering  away  the  Nation's  financial  independence. 

But  in  spite  of  the  efforts  of  the  Administration  and  its  supporters;  in  spite 
of  the  threats  of  money  loaners  at  home  and  abroad;  in  spite  of  the  coercion 
practiced  by  corporate  employers;  in  spite  of  trusts  and  syndicates;  in  spite  of 
an  enormous  Republican  campaign  fund,  and  in  spite  of  the  influence  of  a  hostile 
daily  press,  bimetallism  has  almost  triumphed  in  its  first  great  fight.  The  loss 
of  a  few  States,  and  that,  too,  by  very  small  pluralities,  has  defeated  bimetallism 

625 


626  THE  FUTURE. 

for  the  present,  but  bimetallism  emerges  from  the  contest  stronger  than  it  was* 
four  months  ago. 

I  desire  to  commend  the  work  of  the  three  National  Committees  which  have 
joined  in  the  management  of  this  campaign.  Co-operation  between  the  mem- 
bers of  distinct  political  organizations  is  always  difficult,  but  it  has  been  less  so 
this  year  than  usual.  Interest  in  a  common  cause  of  great  importance  has  re- 
duced friction  to  a  minimum.  I  hereby  express  my  personal  gratitude  to  the  in- 
dividual members,  as  well  as  to  the  executive  officers,  of  the  National  Commit- 
tee of  the  Democratic,  Populist  and  Silver  parties  for  their  efficient,  untiring 
and  unselfish  labors.  They  have  laid  the  foundation  for  future  success,  and  will 
be  remembered  as  pioneers  when  victory  is  at  last  secured. 

No  personal  or  political  friend  need  grieve  because  of  my  defeat.  My  ambi- 
tion has  been  to  secure  remedial  legislation,  rather  than  to  enjoy  the  honors 
of  office;  and  therefore  defeat  brings  to  me  no  feeling  of  personal  loss.  Speak- 
ing for  the  wife  who  has  shared  my  labors,  as  well  as  for  myself,  I  desire  to  say 
that  we  have  been  amply  repaid  for  all  that  we  have  done.  In  the  love  of  mill- 
ions of  our  fellow  citizens,  so  kindly  expressed;  in  knowledge  gained  by  per- 
sonal contact  with  the  people  and  in  broadened  sympathies,  we  find  full  com- 
pensation for  whatever  efforts  we  have  put  forth.  Our  hearts  have  been  touched 
by  the  devotion  of  friends  and  our  lives  shall  prove  our  appreciation  of  the 
affection  of  the  plain  people — an  affection  which  we  prize  as  the  richest  reward 
which  this  campaign  has  brought. 

In  the  face  of  an  enemy  rejoicing  in  its  victory,  let  the  roll  be  called  for  the 
next  engagement.  I  urge  all  friends  of  bimetallism  to  renew  their  allegiance 
to  the  cause.  If  we  are  right,  as  I  believe  we  are,  we  shall  yet  triumph.  Until 
convinced  of  his  error,  let  each  advocate  of  bimetallism  continue  the  work. 
Let  all  silver  clubs  retain  their  organization,  hold  regular  meetings  and  circu- 
late literature.  Our  opponents  have  succeeded  in  this  campaign  and  must  now 
put  their  theories  to  the  test.  Instead  of  talking  mysteriously  about  "sound 
money"  and  an  "honest  dollar"  they  must  now  elaborate  and  defend  a  financial 
system.  Every  step  taken  by  them  should  be  publicly  considered  by  the  silver 
clubs.  Our  cause  has  prospered  most  where  the  money  question  has  been  long- 
est discussed  among  the  people.  During  the  next  four  years  it  will  be 
studied  all  over  this  Nation  even  more  than  it  has  been  studied  in  the  past. 
The  year  1900  is  not  far  away.  Before  that  year  arrives  international  bimetallism 
will  cease  to  deceive;  before  that  year  arrives  those  who  have  called  themselves 
gold  standard  Democrats  will  become  bimetallists  and  be  with  us,  or  they  will 
become  Republicans  and  be  open  enemies;  before  that  year  arrives  trusts  will 
have  convinced  still  more  people  that  a  trust  is  a  menace  to  private  welfare  and 
to  public  safety;  before  that  year  arrives  the  evil  effects  of  a  gold  standard 
will  be  even  more  evident  than  they  are  now,  and  the  people,  then  ready  to 
demand  an  American  financial  policy  for  the  American  people,  will  join  with  us 
in  the  immediate  restoration  of  the  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  gold  and 
silver  at  the  present  legal  ratio  of  16  to  i,  without  waiting  for  the  aid  or  consent 
of  any  other  nation. 

IVIany  of  the  gold  advocates  have  criticised  me  severely  for  aovising 
the  friends  of  free  coinage  to  continue  the  agitation  of  the  subject. 


THE  FUTURE.  ■  627 

Gold  Republicans,  who  have  never  hesitated  to  agitate  for  a  protective 
tariff,  have  suddenly  found  that  agitation  upon  the  money  question  is  a 
political  sin.  Gold  Democrats,  who  have  always  been  willing  to  agitate 
for  tariff  reform,  are  now  horrified  to  think  that  any  one  should  infringe 
upon  their  rights  by  discussing  any  other  public  question;  while  some 
of  the  bankers  divide  their  time  between  agitation  for  reform  in  our 
currency  laws  and  the  denunciation  of  those  who  agitate  for  a  change 
in  our  financial  policy. 

In  a  Government  like  ours,  agitation,  which  is  but  another  term 
for  public  discussion,  is  the  only  means  for  the  remedying  of  abuses. 
No  wise  policy  can  be  injured  by  agitation.  If  the  advocates  of  free 
coinage  were  right  in  the  position  taken  during  the  campaign,  they  are 
still  right.  The  election  indicates  that  the  people  desire  to  experi- 
ment with  the  gold  standard  for  four  years  more.  If  at  the  end  of 
four  years  they  desire  to  continue  the  experiment,  they  can  do  so;  if, 
however,  they  then  desire  to  make  a  change,  they  have  a  right  to 
make  it. 

The  clubs,  whether  they  be  purely  silver  clubs  or  party  clubs, 
composed  of  persons  who  believe  in  free  coinage,  should,  in  my  judg- 
ment, continue  their  organization  and  hold  meetings  from  time  to 
time  for  the  discussion  of  various  phases  of  the  money  question. 
While  I  advise  silver  clubs  to  continue  their  organization,  I  hope 
that  the  gold  clubs  will  also.  The  principle  of  bimetallism  has  nothing 
to  fear  from  contact  with  the  gold  standard  doctrine.  In  fact,  nothing 
would  help  the  silver  cause  more  than  an  attempt  upon  the  part  of 
the  gold  clubs  to  discuss  the  money  question  before  the  people.  The 
silver  clubs  should  stand  ready  to  furnish  well  trained  speakers  when- 
ever the  gold  clubs  are  willing  to  engage  in  joint  debate.  If  we  are 
right,  our  cause  may  expect  to  profit  by  public  discussion.  If  we 
are  wrong,  we  ought  still  to  be  anxious  for  public  discussion  in  order 
that  we  ourselves  may  be  set  right. 

Since  the  election  nearly  all  Democratic  and  silver  clubs  have  re- 
organized, and  in  so  doing  some  of  them  have  paid  me  the  com- 
pliment of  continuing  my  narne  as  part  of  the  designation  of  the  clubs. 
I  have  taken  occasion  to  express  my  opinion  upon  this  subject,  and 
give  below  an  extract  from  my  remarks  at  the  banquet  given  on  the 
8th  of  January,  1897,  at  Chicago,  by  the  William  J.  Bryan  League. 

Extract  from  Jackson  Day  Speech. 
I  believe  that  a  cause  is  so  much  greater  than  any  individual  that  it  should 
not  be  burdened  by  any  mistakes  which  he  may  make.     While  a  man  Hves  he 


628  THE  FUTURE. 

is  liable  to  err,  and  his  errors  are  apt  to  injure  any  cause  with  which  he  is 
closelj'  identified.  During  a  campaign  a  cause  must  be  identified,  for  the  time 
being,  with  the  candidate,  but  when  the  campaign  is  over  and  the  candidate 
no -longer  acts  in  a  representative  capacity,  I  believe  it  is  wise  to  disassociate 
him  from  the  cause,  as  far  as  possible,  in  order  that  public  attention  may  be 
centered  upon  principles  and  policies  rather  than  upon  man. 

In  preparing  for  future  work  more  attention  should  be  paid  to  our 
newspapers.  No  words  of  praise  are  too  strong  to  commend  the  work 
done  by  the  silver  papers  during  the  last  campaign.  While  we  were 
not  nearly  so  well  supplied  as  our  opponents  with  daily  papers,  those 
which  we  did  have  did  most  effective  service,  while  the  weekly  news- 
papers were  of  invaluable  assistance  to  the  cause.  In  my  Congressional 
contest,  I  learned  to  appreciate  the  value  of  the  weekly  newspaper; 
their  zeal  and  earnestness  could  not  have  been  surpassed.  Sometimes 
the  enemies  of  a  paper  are  more  careful  to  show  resentment  than  its 
friends  are  to  express  appreciation  of  its  work.  If  we  are  to  have 
newspaper  support  in  the  fight  for  bimetallism,  friendly  newspapers 
must  have  the  support  of  bimetallists.  I  cannot  do  the  cause  of  free 
coinage  greater  service  than  by  impressing  upon  every  friend  the 
necessity  of  making  such  sacrifices  as  are  necessary  to  properly  sup- 
port the  silver  papers.  Every  county  should  have  a  silver  weekly, 
every  State  should  have  a  silver  organ,  and  every  city  should  have  a 
silver  daily  in  keeping  with  its  population.  All  of  these  papers  should 
be  sufficiently  supported  to  enable  them  to  meet  the  opposition  upon 
an  equal  footing.  If  the  plain  people  refuse  to  give  encouragement 
to  those  who  fight  their  battles,  they  need  not  expect  to  have  de- 
fenders. 

The  clubs  can  do  great  service  by  encouraging  a  healthy  sentiment 
in  favor  of  the  support  of  strong  and  vigorous  newspapers. 

Whether  or  not  bimetallism  is  finally  secured  in  1900  is  immaterial 
so  far  as  the  duty  of  the  bimetallist  is  concerned.  Every  citizen  is 
under  obligation  to  contend  for  those  policies  which  he  believes  to  be 
1)est;  whether  he  sees  at  once,  or  even  ever  sees,  the  fulfillment  of  his 
hopes  is  a  question  which  he  cannot  determine.  The  man  who  does 
his  duty  does  all  that  is  required.  He  may  not  live  to  enjoy  the  full 
fruition  of  his  work,  but  he  knows  that  every  effort  put  forth  in  behalf 
of  a  righteous  cause  contributes  to  the  final  triumph.  We  are  enjoy- 
ing the  results  of  the  labor  of  those  who  went  before  us,  and  those  who 
come  after  us  are  entitled  to  our  best  efforts. 

In  the  contest  for  the  restoration  of  the  money  of  the  Constitution, 
however,  we  have  reason  to  believe  that  1900  wxW  mark  the  overthrow 


THE  FUTURE.  629 

of  the  single  gold  standard.  We  find  bimetallism  strongest  where 
it  has  been  most  discussed — conclusive  proof  that  it  stands  upon  its 
own  merits.  We  find  that  the  gold  standard  is  already  disappointing 
those  who  had  hoped  for  the  return  of  general  prosperity  as  a  result  of 
the  election.  The  sending  of  a  prominent  Senator  to  Europe  to  secure 
an  international  agreement  is  evidence  that  the  gold  standard  is  still 
concealing  its  blessings  from  the  American  people.  Why  should  we 
be  asking  other  nations  to  join  us  in  changing  our  financial  system,  if 
the  present  one  is  satisfactory?  Will  our  opponents  admit  the  injustice 
of  the  gold  standard  by  trying  to  secure  international  bimetallism,  or 
will  they  violate  the  platform  pledge  to  promote  an  international  agree- 
ment ? 

Each  individual,  however  deep  may  be  his  convictions,  must  recog- 
nize the  possibility  of  error,  but  there  is  a  common  ground  upon  which 
all  can  plant  themselves — namely,  that  in  the  end  the  best  financial 
policy  will  be  adopted. 

In  my  Baltimore  speech  and  on  many  other  occasions  I  asserted 
that  no  question  is  settled  until  it  is  settled  right,  and  I  know  of  no 
better  sentiment  with  which  to  conclude  this  volume.  Soon  after 
the  election  my  attention  was  called  to  a  poem  written  by  Mrs.  Ella 
Wheeler  Wilcox,  which  presents  this  thought  so  forcibly,  and  in  such 
appropriate  language,  that  I  reproduce  it  under  the  title  of  "An 
Inspiration." 


AN  INSPIRATION. 


HOWEVER  the  battle  is  ended, 
Though  proudly  the  victor  comes 
With  fluttering  flags  and  prancing  nags 
And  echoing  roll  of  drums, 
Still  truth  proclaims  this  motto 

In  letters  of  living  light, — 
No  question  is  ever  settled 
Until  it  is  settled  right. 

Though  the  heel  of  the  strong  oppressor 

May  grind  the  weak  in  the  dust, 
And  the  voices  of  fame  with  one  acclaim 

May  call  him  great  and  just. 
Let  those  who  applaud  take  warning, 

And  keep  this  motto  in  sight, — 
No  question  is  ever  settled 

Until  it  is  settled  right. 

Let  those  who  have  failed  take  courage; 

Tho'  the  enemy  seems  to  have  won, 
Tho'  his  ranks  are  strong,  if  he  be  in  the  wrong 

The  battle  is  not  yet  done ; 
For,  sure  as  the  morning  follows 

The  darkest  hour  of  the  night, 
No  question  is  ever  settled 

Until  it  is  settled  right. 

O  man  bowed  down  with  labor! 

O  woman  young,  yet  old! 
O  heart  oppressed  in  the  toiler's  breast 

And  crushed  by  the  power  of  gold ! 
Keep  on  with  your  weary  battle 

Against  triumphant  might; 
No  question  is  ever  settled 

Until  it  is  settled  right. 
630 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hiigard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  UBHARY  FAOLITV 


I 


A     000  533  723     3 


